Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35655276›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2022

Accelerating problem-solving capacities of sub-national public health professionals: an evaluation of a digital immunization training intervention.

Karen E Watkins, Lorilee R Sandmann, Cody Aaron Dailey, Beixi Li, Sung-Eun Yang, Robert S Galen, Reda Sadki

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2022. 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
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Karen E WatkinsLearning, Leadership and Organization Development Program, Mary Frances Early College of Education, University of Georgia, 850 College Station Rd, Athens, GA, USA. kwatkins@uga.edu.
Lorilee R SandmannLearning, Leadership and Organization Development Program, Mary Frances Early College of Education, University of Georgia, 850 College Station Rd, Athens, GA, USA.
Cody Aaron DaileyCollege of Public Health, University of Georgia, 100 Foster Rd, Athens, GA, USA.
Beixi LiOffice of Health Affairs, West Virginia University, 64 Medical Center Dr, Morgantown, WV, USA.
Sung-Eun YangLearning, Leadership and Organization Development Program, Mary Frances Early College of Education, University of Georgia, 850 College Station Rd, Athens, GA, USA.
Robert S GalenCollege of Public Health, University of Georgia, 100 Foster Rd, Athens, GA, USA.
Reda SadkiThe Geneva Learning Foundation, Av. Louis-Casaï 18, Geneva, Switzerland.
University of Georgia · USThe Geneva Learning FoundationWest Virginia University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis article reports an evaluation of the Immunization Training Challenge Hackathons (ITCH), invented by The Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF) for national and sub-national immunization staff who strive to develop the knowledge and capacity of others to improve immunization program performance. ITCH, a fully-digital program focused on networked collaborative problem-solving between peers, provided an "opt-in" activity for learners in the Teach to Reach (T2R) Accelerator Program designed to improve training effectiveness in the immunization sphere.

methodsConducted by a team from the University of Georgia, this mixed method evaluation consisted of thematic analysis of recorded sessions and open-ended comments; and statistical analyses of application and follow-up survey data. The evaluation focused on what was learned and how ITCH participants implemented what they learned. Key stakeholder interviews provided supplemental data about program intent and results. ITCH consisted of 17 30-min sessions held in 2020, in English and French, with 581 participating at least once out of 1,454 enrolled in the overall program. Challenge owners and respondents came from 15 African and Asian countries and spanned different roles with differing scope.

resultsOver 85% [n = 154] of survey respondents [n = 181, a 31% response rate] indicated they were able to implement what they learned from the ITCH sessions. A majority [n = 139, 76.7%] reported finding the sessions useful. Issues with poor connectivity and the timing of the live meetings impeded some in their ability to participate, a problem compounded by consequences of the pandemic. The ITCH process constituted of learning or coming to consciousness simultaneously of four types of learning - participants realizing how much they could learn from each other (peer learning), experiencing the power of defying distance to solve problems together (remote learning), and feeling a growing sense of belonging to a community (social learning), emergent across country borders and health system levels (networked learning).

conclusionsBased on evaluation findings, it was concluded that ITCH demonstrated an effective scalable, informal, non-didactic, experience-led, fast-paced, peer learning design. A focus on community engagement and developing brokering skills was recommended.

Indexed as

ImmunizationPublic HealthHumansImmunization ProgramsPeer GroupProblem SolvingCapacity-buildingEvaluationImmunizationPeer learningProblem-solving capabilitiesSub-national public health professionalsTraining

Identifiers

PMID35655276
PMCPMC9161754
OpenAlexW4281844442

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.