ArticleBMJ leader2023
Evaluating transformative health leadership education for Indigenous health: a mixed methods study.
Article in BMJ leader, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is an urgent need to improve structural competency and anti-racism education across health systems. Many leaders in health systems have the ability and responsibility to play a significant role in policy change and transforming healthcare delivery to address health inequities and injustices. The aim of this project was to evaluate a new health leadership Indigenous health course: PLUS4I.
methodsA mixed methods design grounded in a pragmatic paradigm was used. Attendees to the first four cohorts (n=75) were sent an invitation to complete a survey evaluating their learning immediately after the completion of PLUS4I. We retrospectively collected self-efficacy ratings from participants who were also invited to participate in a semi-structured interview about their experience in PLUS4I. Descriptive statistical analysis was conducted for the quantitative assessment of the survey data. A qualitative descriptive approach to thematic analysis was used for the qualitative interview data.
resultsA total of 45 completed quantitative evaluations (n=45) were completed across all four cohorts. Paired t-tests were used to show pre-changes and post-changes in self-reported confidence on a 6-point Likert scale across four categories of activities. Improvements were seen in the ratings across all categories of activities, and all were statistically significant (p<0.001). Two overarching themes emerged from the qualitative analysis: breaking down previous knowledge and critical applications; building new knowledge and change-making competencies. The qualitative interviews (n=25) averaged 32:23 min, with 18 female (72%) and 7 male (28%) interview participants.
conclusionFuture work will support expansion of the PLUS4I course into other work environments and faculties, where the learning environment, structure and relevant Truth and Reconciliation Calls to Action may be different. This work responds to the urgent need to create systems-level change to address structural racism and implement high-quality Indigenous health and anti-racism education.
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.