Evaluating a Web-Based Training Program for Nurses on Shared Decision-Making and Screening for Down Syndrome: Protocol for a Randomized Control Trial (Preprint)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND Pregnant women have difficulty choosing from amongst the wide variety of available prenatal screening options. To help pregnant women and their partners make informed decisions based on their values, needs, and preferences, a decision aid (DA) and a web-based shared decision making (SDM) training program for health professionals have been developed. In Canada, nurses have responsibilities regarding maternity care and thus the potential to do decision coaching on prenatal screening. However, there is a gap of knowledge concerning the effectiveness of SDM interventions in this area of nursing practice. OBJECTIVE This study aims to assess the impact of an SDM training program on nurses’ intention to use a decision aid for prenatal screening as well as their knowledge and overall appreciation of the training. METHODS This is a two-arm parallel randomized trial. Nurses working with pregnant women from the province of Quebec, and speaking in French, will be recruited online by a private survey firm. They will be randomly allocated (1:1 ratio) to either an experimental group, which will complete a web-based SDM training program for prenatal screening, or to a control group, which will complete a web-based training program focusing on prenatal screening alone. The experimental intervention consists of a three hour web-based and fully automated training activity hosted on the University Laval platform and has four modules: 1) SDM; 2) Down syndrome prenatal screening; 3) DA; and 4) Communication between healthcare professionals and the patient. For the control group, the topic of SDM in Module 1 has been replaced with “Context and history of prenatal screening” and the topic of DA in Module 3 has been replaced with “Consent in prenatal screening.” In addition to sociodemographic questions using a self-administered questionnaire with closed ended questions, we will assess 1) intention to use a DA in prenatal screening clinical practice; 2) knowledge; 3) satisfaction with the training; 4) acceptability; and 5) perceived usefulness. The randomization will be done by a predetermined sequence and include 36 nurses. Participants and researchers will be blinded. Intention to use DA will be assessed by a Student t test and bivariate and multivariate analysis will be performed to assess knowledge and overall appreciation of the training. RESULTS This study is ongoing and results will be available at the end of 2020 CONCLUSIONS This study results will inform on the impact of an SDM training program on nurses’ intention to use a decision aid for prenatal screening as well as their knowledge and overall appreciation of the training. It will also provide feedback on ways to upgrade the SDM training program, if needed. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT04162288
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,039 | 0,039 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,011 | 0,006 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,008 | 0,008 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,074 | 0,011 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».