Blog
About

13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Evaluating the effectiveness of an emergency preparedness training programme for public health staff in China

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Summary

          Background

          The severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) crisis of 2003 provided a new urgency in China in terms of preparing public health staff to respond effectively to public health emergencies. Although the Chinese Government has already carried out a series of emergency education and training programmes to improve public health staff's capability of emergency preparedness, it remains unclear if these training programmes are effective and feasible. The purpose of this research was to evaluate an emergency preparedness training programme and to develop a participatory training approach for emergency response.

          Methods

          Seventy-six public health staff completed the emergency preparedness training programme. The effectiveness of the training was evaluated by questionnaire before training, immediately after training and 12 months after training (follow-up). Additionally, semi-structured interviews were conducted throughout the training period.

          Results

          The emergency preparedness training improved the knowledge levels and increased attitudinal and behavioural intention scores for emergency preparedness ( P<0.01). The results at follow-up showed that the knowledge levels and attitudinal/behavioural intention scores of participants decreased slightly ( P>0.05) compared with levels immediately after training ( P<0.01). However, there was a significant increase compared with before training ( P<0.01). Moreover, more than 80% of participants reported that the training process and resources were scientific and feasible.

          Conclusions

          The emergency preparedness training programme met its aims and objectives satisfactorily, and resulted in positive shifts in knowledge and attitudinal/behavioural intentions for public health staff. This suggests that this emergency training strategy was effective and feasible in improving the capability of emergency preparedness.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Psychometric considerations in evaluating health-related quality of life measures.

          How does one determine if a measure of health-related quality of life (HRQL) is adequate for clinical trials? Psychometric methods are frequently used to answer this question. What is psychometrics all about? In this paper we address these questions, discussing common psychometric evaluation procedures applied to HRQL measures. Specifically, we discuss issues regarding the evaluation of reliability and validity (including responsiveness).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Relative effectiveness of worker safety and health training methods.

            We sought to determine the relative effectiveness of different methods of worker safety and health training aimed at improving safety knowledge and performance and reducing negative outcomes (accidents, illnesses, and injuries). Ninety-five quasi-experimental studies (n=20991) were included in the analysis. Three types of intervention methods were distinguished on the basis of learners' participation in the training process: least engaging (lecture, pamphlets, videos), moderately engaging (programmed instruction, feedback interventions), and most engaging (training in behavioral modeling, hands-on training). As training methods became more engaging (i.e., requiring trainees' active participation), workers demonstrated greater knowledge acquisition, and reductions were seen in accidents, illnesses, and injuries. All methods of training produced meaningful behavioral performance improvements. Training involving behavioral modeling, a substantial amount of practice, and dialogue is generally more effective than other methods of safety and health training. The present findings challenge the current emphasis on more passive computer-based and distance training methods within the public health workforce.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Criteria for use in the evaluation of health impact assessments.

               ,  Andrew J Parry,  J R Kemm (2005)
              This paper reports the conclusions of a recent workshop that was established to discuss how health impact assessments (HIAs) might be evaluated. The main purposes of HIA are: (a) to predict the consequences of different decisions; (b) to make the decision-making process more open by involving stakeholders; and (c) to inform the decision makers. 'Prediction', 'participation' and 'informing decision makers' are thus the three domains in which HIA should be evaluated. In the 'prediction' domain, process criteria scrutinize the methods used to see if it is likely that they would produce reliable predictions. Outcome criteria involve verifying the predictions, but this is frequently impractical and predictions for the counter factual (the option not chosen) can never be verified. In the 'participation' domain, process criteria examine the ways in which stakeholders were involved, while outcome criteria explore the degree to which the stakeholders felt included. In the 'informing decision makers' domain, process criteria are concerned with the communication between decision makers and those doing the HIA, and should reflect upon the relevance of the HIA content to the decision makers' agenda. Outcome criteria explore the degree to which the decision makers considered that they had been informed by the HIA. This paper concludes with suggestions for the types of information that should be included in HIA reports in order to permit the readers to make an assessment of the 'quality' of the HIA using the three domain criteria outlined above.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Public Health
                Public Health
                Public Health
                The Royal Institute of Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
                0033-3506
                1476-5616
                15 January 2008
                May 2008
                15 January 2008
                : 122
                : 5
                : 471-477
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, PR China
                [b ]MOE Key Laboratory of Environment and Health, School of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, PR China
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Hangkong Road 13, Wuhan 430030, PR China. Tel.: +86 27 62434794; fax: +86 27 83693763. tjnsf2005@ 123456126.com
                Article
                S0033-3506(07)00277-6
                10.1016/j.puhe.2007.08.006
                7111704
                18199462
                Copyright © 2007 The Royal Institute of Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                Categories
                Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article