Feasibility of Two Educational Methods for Teaching New Mothers: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Printed health educational materials are commonly issued to prepare patients for hospital discharge. Teaching methods that engage multiple senses have been shown to positively affect learning outcomes, suggesting that paper materials may not be the most effective approach when educating new mothers. In addition, many written patient educational materials do not meet national health literacy guidelines. Videos that stimulate visual and auditory senses provide an alternative, potentially more effective, strategy for delivering health information. The acceptability of these methods, as perceived by nurses executing patient education initiatives, is important for determining the most appropriate strategy. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility of 2 educational methods for teaching new mothers how to care for themselves and their infants after hospital discharge. Feasibility was measured by adequate enrollment, acceptability of the intervention to patients and nurses, and initial efficacy. METHODS: New mothers (n=98) on a Mother-Baby Unit received health information focused on self-care and infant care delivered as either simple printed materials or YouTube videos on an iPad. Mothers completed a pretest, post-test, and an acceptability survey. Following completion of the initiative, nurses who participated in delivering the health education using one of these 2 methods were asked to complete a survey to determine their satisfaction with and confidence in using the materials. RESULTS: Mothers, on average, were 26 years old; 72% had a high school education; and 41% were African American. The improvement in knowledge scores was significantly higher for the iPad group (8.6% vs 4.4%, P=.02) compared to the pamphlet group. Group (B=4.81, P=.36) and time (B=6.12, P<.001) significantly affected scores, while no significant interaction effect was observed (B=5.69, P=.09). There were no significant differences in responses between the groups (all P values >.05). The nurses had a mean age of 44.3 years (SD 13.9) and had, on average, 16.6 years of experience (SD 13.8). The nurses felt confident and satisfied administering both educational modalities. CONCLUSIONS: The pamphlet and iPad were identified as feasible and acceptable modalities for educating new mothers about self-care and infant care, though the iPad was more effective in improving knowledge. Understanding the acceptability of different teaching methods to patient educators is important for successful delivery of informational materials at discharge.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".