Dataset Information

How can we improve knowledge and perceptions of menstruation? A mixed-methods research study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Traditionally, menstrual education has consisted of lectures directed toward women. The objective of this study was to design an innovative menstrual education (ME) program that reflects the needs of both young women and men, and verify its effectiveness. METHODS:A mixed-method design was used to determine the program needs and assess young adults' knowledge and perceptions of menstruation and menstrual products. Focus group interviews were conducted with 14 young adults, and 150 young adults participated in an online survey. After developing the ME program, 10 young adults participated in a study to verify its effectiveness. RESULTS:Interview results showed young adults wanted more information about menstrual products. The online survey revealed significant differences in knowledge based on participants' general characteristics and experience; exposure to menstruation and menstrual products positively impacted knowledge and perception. In addition, the results indicated young adults wanted ME content access via mobile and in-person modalities, designed for both genders, drawing on menstrual experts' knowledge. Based on these results, a multi-experimental menstrual education (MEME) program was designed and included: hands-on exposure to 60 menstrual products, product demonstrations with a female perineal model, a YouTube video created by the researchers, a true-or-false quiz, and question-and-answer sessions with menstrual experts. CONCLUSIONS:This study clarified the requirements of an innovative menstrual education program. It led to high satisfaction among participants, and improved knowledge and perceptions of menstruation and menstrual products. The online survey showed a correlation between the extent of received ME, and respondents' perception of menstrual products. This implied that a MEME program could change perceptions when conducted systematically; by extension it could ameliorate menstruation challenges attributed to poverty. Future research could further verify the effectiveness of the MEME program, using a larger sample, and examine its suitability for incorporation into official ME curricula at universities and companies. TRIAL REGISTRATION:This trial was registered in a Clinical Research Information Service in Korea linked with the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (WHO's ICTRP) (no. KCT0004715 ), Registered 07 Feb 2020.

SUBMITTER: Moon G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7526121 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

How can we improve knowledge and perceptions of menstruation? A mixed-methods research study.

Moon Gayoung G Kim Inkyung I Kim Habhin H Choe Suwan S Jeon Soyeon S Cho Jeonghun J Hong Sujeong S Lee Jisan J

BMC women's health 20200929 1

<h4>Background</h4>Traditionally, menstrual education has consisted of lectures directed toward women. The objective of this study was to design an innovative menstrual education (ME) program that reflects the needs of both young women and men, and verify its effectiveness.<h4>Methods</h4>A mixed-method design was used to determine the program needs and assess young adults' knowledge and perceptions of menstruation and menstrual products. Focus group interviews were conducted with 14 young adult ...[more]

PMID: 32993611

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:There is increasing evidence that research misbehaviour is common, especially the minor forms. Previous studies on research misbehaviour primarily focused on biomedical and social sciences, and evidence from natural sciences and humanities is scarce. We investigated what academic researchers in Amsterdam perceived to be detrimental research misbehaviours in their respective disciplinary fields. Methods:We used an explanatory sequential mixed methods design. First, survey participants from four disciplinary fields rated perceived frequency and impact of research misbehaviours from a list of 60. We then combined these into a top five ranking of most detrimental research misbehaviours at the aggregate level, stratified by disciplinary field. Second, in focus group interviews, participants from each academic rank and disciplinary field were asked to reflect on the most relevant research misbehaviours for their disciplinary field. We used participative ranking methodology inducing participants to obtain consensus on which research misbehaviours are most detrimental. Results:In total, 1080 researchers completed the survey (response rate: 15%) and 61 participated in the focus groups (3 three to 8 eight researchers per group). Insufficient supervision consistently ranked highest in the survey regardless of disciplinary field and the focus groups confirmed this. Important themes in the focus groups were insufficient supervision, sloppy science, and sloppy peer review. Biomedical researchers and social science researchers were primarily concerned with sloppy science and insufficient supervision. Natural sciences and humanities researchers discussed sloppy reviewing and theft of ideas by reviewers, a form of plagiarism. Focus group participants further provided examples of particular research misbehaviours they were confronted with and how these impacted their work as a researcher. Conclusion:We found insufficient supervision and various forms of sloppy science to score highly on aggregate detrimental impact throughout all disciplinary fields. Researchers from the natural sciences and humanities also perceived nepotism to be of major impact on the aggregate level. The natural sciences regarded fabrication of data of major impact as well. The focus group interviews helped to understand how researchers interpreted 'insufficient supervision'. Besides, the focus group participants added insight into sloppy science in practice. Researchers from the natural sciences and humanities added new research misbehaviours concerning their disciplinary fields to the list, such as the stealing of ideas before publication. This improves our understanding of research misbehaviour beyond the social and biomedical fields.

Project description:BackgroundClinical research coordinators (CRCs) facilitate the interaction between researchers and knowledge users in rehabilitation centres to promote and sustain evidence-informed practices. Despite their presence in rehabilitation settings in Quebec for over 20 years, little is known about their profiles and knowledge translation (KT) activities nor how they can best enact their role. This study explored CRCs' roles and perspectives on the barriers, enablers, and strategies for improving KT activities in rehabilitation settings.MethodsWe conducted a multi-centre, participatory sequential mixed methods study. In the descriptive quantitative phase, we collected data via an online survey to determine CRCs' role in research and KT. In the subsequent qualitative phase, we conducted an in-person focus group to elicit CRCs' perspectives regarding factors influencing their work in KT, and potential solutions for overcoming these challenges. We used a descriptive and an inductive content analysis approach for the data analysis. The data synthesis was inspired by the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework.ResultsAll nine CRCs from five partner health regions of a large rehabilitation research centre agreed to participate in the study. The data suggest that CRCs are like knowledge brokers and boundary spanners. As information managers, linkage agents and facilitators, CRCs play a pivot role in diffusion, dissemination, synthesis and tailoring of knowledge to improve evidence informed practices and quality of care in rehabilitation. The factors influencing CRCs' KT activities are mostly linked to the context such as the receptivity of the organization as well as the lack of time and resources, and limited understanding of their roles by stakeholders. Two main suggestions made to enhance CRCs' contribution to KT activities include the harmonisation of expectations between the large research centre and their partner health regions, and better promotion of their role to clinical and research teams.ConclusionsThis study provides valuable insights into the scope of CRCs' role. The results shed light on the challenges that they face and potential solutions to overcome them. The knowledge generated in this study can be used to implement this role with similar duties in rehabilitation settings or other health care domains.

Project description:BackgroundSARS-CoV-2, a new coronavirus first reported by China on December 31st, 2019, has led to a global health crisis that continues to challenge governments and public health organizations. Understanding COVID-19 knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) is key for informing messaging strategies to contain the pandemic. Cross-national studies (e.g.: comparing China to the U.S.) are needed to better understand how trans-cultural differences may drive differences in pandemic response and behaviors. The goal of the study is to compare knowledge and perceptions of COVID-19 between adults in China and the U.S. These data will provide insight into challenges these nations may face in coordinating pandemic response.MethodsThis is a convergent mixed methods study comparing responses from China and the U.S. to a multinational COVID-19 KAP online survey. The survey included five quantitative constructs and five open-ended questions. Chinese respondents (n = 56) were matched for gender, age, education, perceived social standing, and time of survey completion with a U.S. cohort (n = 57) drawn from 10,620 U.S.RespondentsQuantitative responses were compared using T-test & Fisher-Exact tests. Inductive thematic analysis was applied to open-ended questions.ResultsBoth U.S. and Chinese samples had relatively high intention to follow preventive behaviors overall. Differences in intended compliance with a specific recommendation appear to be driven by the different cultural norms in U.S. and China. Both groups expressed trepidation about the speed of COVID-19 vaccine development, driven by concern for safety among Chinese respondents, and concern for efficacy among U.S.RespondentsThe Chinese cohort expressed worries about other countries' passive handling of the pandemic while the U.S. cohort focused on domestic responses from individuals and government. U.S. participants appeared more knowledgeable on some aspects of COVID-19. Different perspectives regarding COVID-19 origins were identified among the two groups. Participants from both samples reported high trust in health professionals and international health organizations.ConclusionsMixed methods data from this cross-national analysis suggests sociocultural differences likely influence perceptions and knowledge of COVID-19 and its related public health policies. Discovering and addressing these culturally-based differences and perceptions are essential to coordinate a global pandemic response.

Project description:Dedicated Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) courses are often included in health professional education programs. It is important to understand the effectiveness of this training. This study investigated EBP outcomes in entry-level physiotherapy students from baseline to completion of all EBP training (graduation).Mixed methods with an explanatory sequential design. Physiotherapy students completed two psychometrically-tested health professional EBP instruments at baseline and graduation. The Evidence-Based Practice Profile questionnaire collected self-reported data (Terminology, Confidence, Practice, Relevance, Sympathy), and the Knowledge of Research Evidence Competencies instrument collected objective data (Actual Knowledge). Focus groups with students were conducted at graduation to gain a deeper understanding of the factors impacting changes in students' EBP knowledge, attitudes, behaviour and competency. Descriptive statistics, paired t-tests, 95% CI and effect sizes (ES) were used to examine changes in outcome scores from baseline to graduation. Transcribed focus group data were analysed following a qualitative descriptive approach with thematic analysis. A second stage of merged data analysis for mixed methods studies was undertaken using side-by-side comparisons to explore quantitatively assessed EBP measures with participants' personal perceptions.Data were analysed from 56 participants who completed both instruments at baseline and graduation, and from 21 focus group participants. Large ES were reported across most outcomes: Relevance (ES 2.29, p???0.001), Practice (1.8, p???0.001), Confidence (1.67, p???0.001), Terminology (3.13, p???0.001) and Actual Knowledge (4.3, p???0.001). A medium ES was found for Sympathy (0.49, p?=?0.008). Qualitative and quantitative findings mostly aligned but for statistical terminology, participants' self-reported understanding was disparate with focus group reported experiences. Qualitative findings highlighted the importance of providing relevant context and positive role models for students during EBP training.Following EBP training across an entry-level physiotherapy program, there were qualitative and significant quantitative changes in participants' knowledge and perceptions of EBP. The qualitative and quantitative findings were mainly well-aligned with the exception of the Terminology domain, where the qualitative findings did not support the strength of the effect reported quantitatively. The findings of this study have implications for the timing and content of EBP curricula in entry-level health professional programs.

Project description:BackgroundLack of knowledge about systematic reviews (SRs) could prevent individual healthcare workers (HCWs) from using SRs as a source of information in their clinical practice or discourage them from participating in such research. In this study, we aimed to explore in-depth the opinion of a sample of HCWs about the newly created online educational intervention designed to improve knowledge about SRs.MethodsWe created a brief online educational intervention on SRs, consisting of 11 textual modules. We evaluated it among practicing HCWs who graduated from a university-level health sciences program using a mixed-methods pilot study that consisted of pre- and post-intervention questionnaires and qualitative evaluation via semi-structured interviews. We assessed participants' knowledge about SR methodology before and after the intervention, and compared the responses. We sought their opinions about the characteristics of SRs. Also, the participants were presented with four scientific abstracts, where they were asked to distinguish whether those abstracts presented summaries of a systematic or a non-systematic review.ResultsTwelve participants took part in the study. In the pilot study, the participants' knowledge about SRs was improved after the intervention compared to the baseline. Participants provided positive feedback regarding the educational intervention. Suggestions to improve the educational intervention were to provide more details about the forest plot, add more digital content or images, provide more details about the methodological steps of an SR, add descriptions about practical applications of SRs and provide links to additional educational materials. The participants suggested that HCWs could be motivated to take part in such an education if it is offered as continuing medical education (CME) course or credit for academic/career advancement.ConclusionHCWs provided positive feedback about the newly designed online educational intervention on SRs; they considered it an appropriate tool for learning about SRs and resulted in increased knowledge about SRs. In addition, participants gave suggestions for improving education, which can be used to tailor the education for end-users. In future studies, it would be useful to examine the effectiveness of the modified educational intervention on increasing knowledge in a larger sample and in the form of a randomized controlled trial.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Novel methods to boost interest in scientific research careers among minority youth are largely unexplored. Social media offers a unique avenue toward influencing teen behavior and attitudes, and can therefore be utilized to stimulate interest in clinical research. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to engage high-achieving minority youth enrolled in a science pipeline program to develop a targeted social media marketing campaign for boosting interest in clinical research careers among their peers. METHODS:Students enrolled in the Training Early Achievers for Careers in Health program conducted focus groups in their communities to inform themes that best promote clinical research. They then scripted, storyboarded, and filmed a short video to share on social media with a campaign hashtag. Additionally, each student enrolled peers from their social circle to be subjects of the study. Subjects were sent a Career Orientation Survey at baseline to assess preliminary interest in clinical research careers and again after the campaign to assess how they saw the video, their perceptions of the video, and interest in clinical research careers after watching the video. Subjects who did not see the video through the online campaign were invited to watch the video via a link on the postsurvey. Interest change scores were calculated using differences in Likert-scale responses to the question "how interested are you in a career in clinical research?" An ordinal logistic regression model was used to test the association between watching a peer-shared video, perception of entertainment, and interest change score controlling for underrepresented minorities in medicine status (Black, American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander), gender, and baseline interest in medical or clinical research careers. RESULTS:From 2014 to 2017, 325 subjects were enrolled as part of 4 distinct campaigns: #WhereScienceMeetsReality, #RedefiningResearch, #DoYourResearch, and #LifeWithoutResearch. Over half (n=180) of the subjects watched the video via the campaign, 227/295 (76.9%) found the video entertaining, and 92/325 (28.3%) demonstrated baseline interest in clinical research. The ordinal logistic regression model showed that subjects who viewed the video from a peer (odds ratio [OR] 1.56, 95% CI 1.00-2.44, P=.05) or found the video entertaining (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.01-1.82, P=.04) had greater odds of increasing interest in a clinical research career. Subjects with a higher baseline interest in medicine (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.28-1.87, P<.001) also had greater odds of increasing their interest in clinical research. CONCLUSIONS:The spread of authentic and relevant peer-created messages via social media can increase interest in clinical research careers among diverse teens. Peer-driven social media campaigns should be explored as a way to effectively recruit minority youth into scientific research careers.

Dataset Information

How can we improve knowledge and perceptions of menstruation? A mixed-methods research study.

Publications

How can we improve knowledge and perceptions of menstruation? A mixed-methods research study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets