Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27539960›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2016

Evaluation of a Web-Based E-Learning Platform for Brief Motivational Interviewing by Nurses in Cardiovascular Care: A Pilot Study.

Guillaume Fontaine, Sylvie Cossette, Sonia Heppell, Louise Boyer, Tanya Mailhot, Marie-Josée Simard, Jean-Francois Tanguay

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Guillaume FontaineMontreal Heart Institute Research Center, Montréal, QC, Canada. guillaume.fontaine@umontreal.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-7806-814X
Marie-Josée SimardORCID 0000-0003-1044-8901
Jean-Francois TanguayORCID 0000-0003-1057-0528
Montreal Heart Institute · CAUniversité de Montréal · CA

Funding

Canadian Institutes for Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBrief motivational interviewing (MI) can contribute to reductions in morbidity and mortality related to coronary artery disease, through health behavior change. Brief MI, unlike more intensive interventions, was proposed to meet the needs of clinicians with little spare time. While the provision of face-to-face brief MI training on a large scale is complicated, Web-based e-learning is promising because of the flexibility it offers.

objectiveThe primary objective of this pilot study was to examine the feasibility and acceptability of a Web-based e-learning platform for brief MI (MOTIV@CŒUR), which was evaluated by nurses in cardiovascular care. The secondary objective was to assess the preliminary effect of the training on nurses' perceived brief MI skills and self-reported clinical use of brief MI.

methodsWe conducted a single-group, pre-post pilot study involving nurses working in a coronary care unit to evaluate MOTIV@CŒUR, which is a Web-based e-learning platform for brief MI, consisting of two sessions lasting 30 and 20 minutes. MOTIV@CŒUR covers 4 real-life clinical situations through role-modeling videos showing nurse-client interactions. A brief introduction to MI is followed by role playing, during which a nurse practitioner evaluates clients' motivation to change and intervenes according to the principles of brief MI. The clinical situations target smoking, medication adherence, physical activity, and diet. Nurses were asked to complete both Web-based training sessions asynchronously within 20 days, which allowed assessment of the feasibility of the intervention. Data regarding acceptability and preliminary effects (perceived skills in brief MI, and self-reported clinical use of conviction and confidence interventions) were self-assessed through Web-based questionnaires 30 days (±5 days) after the first session.

resultsWe enrolled 27 women and 4 men (mean age 37, SD 9 years) in March 2016. Of the 31 participants, 24 (77%, 95% CI 63%-91%) completed both sessions in ≤20 days. At 30 days, 28 of the 31 participants (90%) had completed at least one session. The training was rated as highly acceptable, with the highest scores observed for information quality (mean 6.26, SD 0.60; scale 0-7), perceived ease of use (mean 6.16, SD 0.78; scale 0-7), and system quality (mean 6.15, SD 0.58; scale 0-7). Posttraining scores for self-reported clinical use of confidence interventions were higher than pretraining scores (mean 34.72, SD 6.29 vs mean 31.48, SD 6.75, respectively; P=.03; scale 10-50). Other results were nonsignificant.

conclusionsBrief MI training using a Web-based e-learning platform including role-modeling videos is both feasible and acceptable according to cardiovascular care nurses. Further research is required to evaluate the e-learning platform in a randomized controlled trial.

trial registrationInternational Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN): 16510888; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN16510888 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6jf7dr7bx).

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesChildEducation, NursingFemaleHumansInternetMaleMiddle AgedMotivational InterviewingPilot ProjectsSurveys and Questionnairescardiovascular diseasescoronary artery diseasee-learninghealth behavior changemotivational interviewingpilot studyWeb-based learning

Identifiers

PMID27539960
PMCPMC5010651
OpenAlexW2508315362

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.