Empowering women with cardiovascular disease: exploring engagement and educational needs through participatory workshops
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background/Introduction Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death among women worldwide, yet many women face barriers to accessing relevant heart health education. This study aimed to explore the engagement, experiences, and satisfaction of women with lived experience of CVD (WwLE) in a series of workshops designed to enhance cardiovascular education and support empowerment. Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine how WwLE engage with educational resources, the effectiveness of participatory approaches, and the key areas for improving patient education to better meet the needs of women living with CVD. Methods A qualitative study was conducted through five workshops designed for 11 WwLE. The workshops followed the IAP2 engagement spectrum model (Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate, Empower; Figure 1) to assess various levels of participant involvement. Data was collected through post-workshop surveys (including the PEIRS-22) and thematic analysis of participant feedback, focusing on satisfaction, engagement, and key messages for improving education. Results The findings highlighted that woman experienced high levels of engagement, with a mean PEIRS-22 score of 87.6, indicating meaningful participation. Satisfaction scores ranged from 4.5 to 4.6/5 across all workshops. Four key themes emerged from participant feedback: discovery of new resources, the importance of shared lived experiences, feeling valued in participation, and barriers to engagement. Participants expressed enthusiasm about learning new resources, which they had previously been unaware of. They also emphasized the importance of hearing others’ stories, which fostered a sense of connection and empowerment. Challenges included information overload and the size of the group, which limited opportunities for personal contribution. Key recommendations for improving patient education include enhancing the accessibility of resources, embracing storytelling, ensuring diverse representation, using a multi-format approach to cater to different learning styles, and developing proactive strategies for outreach (Figure 2). Conclusion(s) The study’s results underscore the value of integrating lived experiences and peer support in women’s heart health education. These findings provide valuable insights for refining educational materials and strategies aimed at empowering women with CVD to take an active role in managing their health.Engagement Model in Workshops Key Messages for Womens Heart Education
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 | 0.019 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".