MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1931148844 · doi:10.2196/ijmr.4583

Feasibility of Two Educational Methods for Teaching New Mothers: A Pilot Study

2015· article· en· W1931148844 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. Cynthia Logsdon, Deborah Winders Davis, Diane Eckert, Frances Smith, Reetta Stikes, Jeff Rushton, John Myers, Joshua Capps, Kathryn Sparks

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Journal of Medical Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)NursingMedicineLiteracyHealth careHealth literacyMedical educationHealth educationUnit (ring theory)Affect (linguistics)PsychologyFamily medicinePublic healthPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.115
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.157
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.373
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1150.157
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.564
GPT teacher head0.745
Teacher spread0.180 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInteractive Journal of Medical ResearchSame topicHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207