Improving Health Professional Recognition and Response to Child Maltreatment and Intimate Partner Violence: Protocol for Two Mixed Methods Pilot Randomized Controlled Trials
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The optimal educational approach for preparing health professionals with the knowledge and skills to effectively recognize and respond to family violence, including child maltreatment and intimate partner violence, remains unclear. The Violence, Evidence, Guidance, and Action (VEGA) Family Violence Education Resources is a novel intervention that can be completed via self-directed learning or in a workshop format; both approaches focus on improving health professional preparedness to address family violence. OBJECTIVE: Our studies aim to determine the acceptability and feasibility of conducting a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of the self-directed (experimental intervention) and workshop (active control) modalities of VEGA, as an adjunct to standard education, to improve learner (Researching the Impact of Service provider Education [RISE] with Residents) and independent practice (RISE with Veterans) health professional preparedness, knowledge, and skills related to recognizing family violence in their health care encounters. METHODS: The RISE with Residents and RISE with Veterans research studies use embedded experimental mixed methods research designs. The quantitative strand for each study follows the principles of a pilot randomized controlled trial. For RISE with Residents, we aimed to recruit 80 postgraduate medical trainees; for RISE with Veterans, we intended to recruit 80 health professionals who work or have worked with Veterans (or their family members) of the Canadian military or the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in a direct service capacity. Participants complete quantitative assessments at baseline, after intervention, and at 3-month follow-up. A subset of participants from each arm also undergoes a qualitative semistructured interview with the aim of describing participants' perceptions of the value and impact of each VEGA modality, as well as research burden. Scores on potential outcome measures will be mapped to excerpts of qualitative data via a mixed methods joint display to aid in the interpretation of findings. RESULTS: We consented 71 individuals to participate in the RISE with Residents study. Data collection was completed on August 31, 2023, and data are currently being cleaned and prepared for analysis. As of January 15, 2024, we consented 34 individuals in the RISE with Veterans study; data collection will be completed in March 2024. For both studies, no data analysis had taken place at the time of manuscript submission. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications; academic conferences; and posting and sharing of study summaries and infographics on social media, the project website, and via professional network listserves. CONCLUSIONS: Reducing the impacts of family violence remains a pressing public health challenge. Both research studies will provide a valuable methodological contribution about the feasibility of trial methods in health professions education focused on family violence. They will also contribute to education science about the differences in the effectiveness of self-directed versus facilitator-led learning strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05490121, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05490121; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05490004, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05490004. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/50864.
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 | 0,071 | 0,079 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,010 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,016 | 0,011 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,007 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,010 | 0,012 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,086 | 0,015 |
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 ».