ArticlePublic health2017
Evaluation of an online training for improving self-reported evidence-based decision-making skills in cancer control among public health professionals.
Article in Public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strategies to implement evidence-informed decision making at the organizational level: a rapid systematic review.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- Analysis of Barriers to Evidence Transformation and Countermeasures for MARSI Prevention in Tracheal Intubated Patients Based on the i-PARIHS Framework.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Review
- Professional care workforce: a rapid review of evidence supporting methods of recruitment, retention, safety, and education.Human resources for health · 2023Review
- A pragmatic evaluation of a public health knowledge broker mentoring education program: a convergent mixed methods study.Implementation science communications · 2022Article
- Scaling Up Evidence-Based Public Health Training.Preventing chronic disease · 2018Article
- Building Capacity for Evidence-Based Public Health: Reconciling the Pulls of Practice and the Push of Research.Annual review of public health · 2018Review
- Preparing Public Health Professionals to Make Evidence-Based Decisions: A Comparison of Training Delivery Methods in the United States.Frontiers in public health · 2018Article
- Equipping the Public Health Workforce of the Future: Evaluation of an Evidence-Based Public Health Training Delivered Through Academic-Health Department Partnerships.Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMPArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe purpose of this evaluation was to assess the effect of the online evidence-based cancer control (EBCC) training on improving the self-reported evidence-based decision-making (EBDM) skills in cancer control among Nebraska public health professionals. STUDY
designCross-sectional group comparison.
methodsPreviously developed EBDM measures were administered via online surveys to 201 public health professionals at baseline (comparison group) and 123 professionals who took part in the training. Respondents rated the importance of and their skill level in 18 EBCC skills. Differences were examined using analysis of variance models adjusted for gender, age, years at agency, and years in position, and stratified by respondent educational attainment.
resultsAmong professionals without an advanced degree, training participants reported higher overall skill scores (P = .016) than the baseline non-participant group, primarily driven by differences in the partnerships and collaboration and evaluation domains. No differences in importance ratings were observed. Among professionals with advanced degrees, there were no differences in skill scores and small differences in importance scores in the expected direction (P < .05). Respondents at baseline rated the following facilitators for EBDM as important: expectations from agency leaders and community partners, high priority placed on EBDM by leadership, trainings, and positive feedback. They also reported using a variety of materials for making decisions about programs and policies, though few used individual scientific studies.
conclusionsEBCC led to improved self-reported EBDM skills among public health professionals without an advanced degree, though a gap remained between the self-reported skills and the perceived importance of the skills. Further research on training content and modalities for professionals with higher educational attainment and baseline skill scores is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.