Assessing and Validating an Educational Resource Package for Health Professionals to Improve Smoking Cessation Care in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Pregnant Women
Published in
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, September 2017
Australian Aboriginal pregnant women have a high smoking prevalence (45%). Health professionals lack adequate educational resources to manage smoking. Resources need to be tailored to ensure saliency, cultural-sensitivity and account for diversity of Indigenous populations. As part of an intervention to improve health professionals' smoking cessation care in Aboriginal pregnant women, a resource package was developed collaboratively with two Aboriginal Medical Services. The purpose of this study was to assess and validate this resource package. A multi-centred community-based participatory 4-step process (with three Aboriginal Medical Services from three Australian states), included: (1) Scientific review by an expert panel (2) 'Suitability of Materials' scoring by two Aboriginal Health Workers (3) Readability scores (4) Focus groups with health professionals. Content was analysed using six pre-determined themes (attraction, comprehension, self-efficacy, graphics and layout, cultural acceptability, and persuasion), with further inductive analysis for emerging themes. Suitability of Material scoring was adequate or superior. Average readability was grade 6.4 for patient resources (range 5.1-7.2), and 9.8 for health provider resources (range 8.5-10.6). Emergent themes included 'Getting the message right'; 'Engaging with family'; 'Needing visual aids'; and 'Requiring practicality under a tight timeframe'. Results were presented back to a Stakeholder and Consumer Aboriginal Advisory Panel and resources were adjusted accordingly. This process ensured materials used for the intervention were culturally responsive, evidence-based and useful. This novel formative evaluation protocol could be adapted for other Indigenous and culturally diverse interventions. The added value of this time-consuming and costly process is yet to be justified in research, and might impact the potential adaption by other projects.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 April 2018.
All research outputs
#5,328,664
of 29,359,410 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
#8,523
of 33,492 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,403
of 337,460 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
#95
of 311 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,359,410 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,492 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 337,460 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 311 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
