Preferred modalities for delivering continuing education to the public health workforce: a scoping review.

Clicks: 415
ID: 206336
2020
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #3 of 7 articles by views in health promotion and chronic disease prevention in canada : research, policy and practice

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Continuing education (CE) can help public health professionals maintain and further develop their knowledge and skills to adapt to the changing public health landscape. This scoping review aims to identify the preferred modalities for delivering CE to public health professionals and to determine how equity has been incorporated into public health training.Using the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews as a guide, we searched four databases for peer-reviewed primary research studies that evaluated public health workforce CE modalities.The review included 33 studies published between 1 January 2000 and 6 August 2019 from over 11 countries. Most articles broadly described their training audience as public health professionals employed by government or non-governmental organizations. Delivery methods included online, in-person or blended learning (combining online and in-person instruction). Learners strongly preferred self-directed approaches. Organizational support, including protected time for professional development during work hours, was an important enabler of training completion. Commonly cited barriers included course duration and a high number of contact hours.Findings suggest that there is no single preferred training modality. We identified three elements that influence modality preference: design, delivery and organizational support. Modality should be determined by participants' location, needs and previous experiences to ensure the content is relevant and delivered in a way that equips learners to apply the knowledge gained.
Reference Key
archer2020preferredhealth Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Archer, Anya;Berry, Isha;Bajwa, Uttam;Kalda, Robyn;Di Ruggiero, Erica;
Journal health promotion and chronic disease prevention in canada : research, policy and practice
Year 2020
DOI
10.24095/hpcdp.40.4.03
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.