Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32743792›Full record

ArticlePrevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research2020

The Society for Prevention Research 20 Years Later: a Summary of Training Needs.

Sarah M Chilenski, Keryn E Pasch, Ashley Knapp, Elizabeth Baker, Rhonda C Boyd, Camille Cioffi, Brittany Cooper, Abigail Fagan, Laura Hill, Leslie D Leve and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The Context of Elder Maltreatment: an Opportunity for Prevention Science.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2023
    Review
  2. Common Methodological Problems in Randomized Controlled Trials of Preventive Interventions.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2021
    Review
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

11 authors.

Sarah M ChilenskiEdna Bennett Pierce Prevention Research Center, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA. sem268@psu.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-9349-3550
Keryn E PaschDepartment of Kinesiology and Health Education, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
Ashley KnappNorthwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA.
Elizabeth BakerDepartment of Psychology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
Rhonda C BoydThe Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Camille CioffiUniversity of Oregon, Eugene, OR, USA.
Brittany CooperWashington State University, Pullman, WA, USA.
Abigail FaganUniversity of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Laura HillWashington State University, Pullman, WA, USA.
Leslie D LeveUniversity of Oregon, Eugene, OR, USA.
Kelly RulisonUniversity of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, NC, USA.

Funding

Supplement to Prevention Research Center: Parenting Among Women Who Are Opioid Users, Project 2P50DA048756 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF OREGON · PI BERKMAN, ELLIOT TODD · 2019 to 2023
$18.0M
NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA048756
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Society for Prevention Research (SPR) aims to continually provide relevant professional development training opportunities to advance scientific investigation of ways to improve the health, well-being, and social and educational outcomes of individuals and communities. Our study, led by the Training Needs Assessment Task Force, designed a quantitative questionnaire informed by semistructured, qualitative interviews of 13 key prevention science informants. The questionnaire was deployed to all SPR members, of which 347 completed it. Questions about training topics were asked along 8 categories: (1) theory; (2) preventive interventions; (3) research methods, design, and evaluation; (4) teaching and mentoring; (5) practical and interpersonal skills; (6) communication; (7) project management; and (8) data analysis. Across all categories, respondents reported a high level of interest in receiving training: more than 80% were interested in training in data analytic methods; about 70% indicated interest in theory, preventive interventions, and research methods, design, and evaluation; about 65% were interested in at least 1 communication and project management topic; and 60% showed interest in at least 1 practical and interpersonal skills topic. Training-related interests varied across career level and race/ethnicity, with early-career individuals and people of color typically indicating the most interest. Participants were most likely to endorse self-initiated learning and webinars. SPR preconference training workshops were strongly endorsed for data analysis and preventive intervention topics. Recommendations from our study include a need for SPR to more strongly support self-initiated learning opportunities and continue preconference training programs, with special focuses in statistical methods and preventive interventions and regular assessment of members' training preferences.

Indexed as

Health Services ResearchPreventive Health ServicesSocietiesFemaleHumansInservice TrainingLearningMaleMentorsQualitative ResearchRegression AnalysisStaff DevelopmentSurveys and QuestionnairesMethodologyPreventionProfessional developmentTrainingWorkshops

Identifiers

PMID32743792
PMCPMC7462903

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.