Assessing knowledge, attitude and practice of nurses after a continuing professional development program: A qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Nurses play a crucial role in the prevention of communicable diseases through the public health immunization programs. Knowledge, attitude and practices of health care providers have significant impact on the vaccine administration and education of adults and parents of children.Objective: The present qualitative study aims to explore the knowledge, attitude and practices of nurses in Qatar before and after the delivery of the immunization-related continuous professional development program.Methods: 10 out of 125 nurses who have completed the training program volunteered to participate in the face-to-face interviews. Data was then collected, transcribed and analysed by the researcher team members.Results: Themes identified from this study: Empowerment, advancing practice and continuing education. Participants felt more confident and had a sense of fulfilment on completion of the education program. Practicing evidenced based skills and methods achieved an outcome of better quality of care, which can directly affect practice. Participants also felt that continuing education allows them to become self-motivated to keep up with new and emerging knowledge. Taken together, our data revealed that continuing professional education immunization-training program was successful in improving the knowledge, attitude and practices of the participants.Conclusions: Continued education beyond traditional baccalaureate nursing programs in order to ensure nurses possess the knowledge to safely handle, teach and administer vaccines is needed.
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 | 0.012 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".