ABSTRACT
Community health workers (CHWs) bring their unique capacity as liaisons for patients, communities, and health care systems to health care teams. We describe the collaborative development of a community-based CHW program to address the social determinants of health that affect patients. This cosupervisory, generalist CHW model provides an innovative template for cocreation of patient-centered infrastructure and resourcing within an evolving and replicable holistic care continuum across patient ages, diagnoses, health care payers, and communities to promote health equity. The program has been effective in decreasing health care utilization and cost.
Subject(s)
Community Health Workers , Continuity of Patient Care , Primary Health Care/organization & administration , Health Services Accessibility , Health Services Research , Humans , Minnesota , Professional Role , Referral and Consultation , Social Determinants of HealthABSTRACT
The growing importance of genomics and bioinformatics methods and paradigms in biology has been accompanied by an explosion of new curricula and pedagogies. An important question to ask about these educational innovations is whether they are having a meaningful impact on students' knowledge, attitudes, or skills. Although assessments are necessary tools for answering this question, their outputs are dependent on their quality. Our study 1) reviews the central importance of reliability and construct validity evidence in the development and evaluation of science assessments and 2) examines the extent to which published assessments in genomics and bioinformatics education (GBE) have been developed using such evidence. We identified 95 GBE articles (out of 226) that contained claims of knowledge increases, affective changes, or skill acquisition. We found that 1) the purpose of most of these studies was to assess summative learning gains associated with curricular change at the undergraduate level, and 2) a minority (<10%) of studies provided any reliability or validity evidence, and only one study out of the 95 sampled mentioned both validity and reliability. Our findings raise concerns about the quality of evidence derived from these instruments. We end with recommendations for improving assessment quality in GBE.
