A comparison of assessment tools for childcare centers in high vs. low resource settings.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Frontiers in Public Health Pub Date : 2024-11-13 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fpubh.2024.1331423
Hy V Huynh, Eve Puffer, Jan Ostermann, Andrew K Weinhold, Meghan E Lopez, Melissa McGovern, Kathryn Whetten
{"title":"A comparison of assessment tools for childcare centers in high vs. low resource settings.","authors":"Hy V Huynh, Eve Puffer, Jan Ostermann, Andrew K Weinhold, Meghan E Lopez, Melissa McGovern, Kathryn Whetten","doi":"10.3389/fpubh.2024.1331423","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Studies suggest issues may arise when using childcare setting assessment tools designed for high-resource settings in low-resource settings to assess and improve the quality of care, including placing disproportionate weight on features of the childcare environment that may not be available or culturally appropriate within the low-resource context. This study compares a novel assessment tool developed in and for low-income and low-resource settings with a standardized \"gold standard\" tool developed for use in high-resource settings. The study included a randomized sample of 34 childcare centers in a low-resource context that provided care for approximately 918. Results suggest that the WCI-QCUALS assessment tool performed better at differentiating among childcare settings that were consolidated into the lowest rating on the ECERS-R. Further, the WCI-QCUALS was found to be a feasible, appropriate stand-alone tool for assessing the quality of childcare centers in low-resource settings. Additional refinement and validity testing in other countries and contexts will improve the understanding of how the quality of childcare across different contexts can be measured, and improved assessment of childcare quality in low-resource settings will enhance the ability to identify low-quality care that can be remedied to ensure appropriate care for vulnerable children.</p>","PeriodicalId":12548,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Public Health","volume":"12 ","pages":"1331423"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11601126/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1331423","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Studies suggest issues may arise when using childcare setting assessment tools designed for high-resource settings in low-resource settings to assess and improve the quality of care, including placing disproportionate weight on features of the childcare environment that may not be available or culturally appropriate within the low-resource context. This study compares a novel assessment tool developed in and for low-income and low-resource settings with a standardized "gold standard" tool developed for use in high-resource settings. The study included a randomized sample of 34 childcare centers in a low-resource context that provided care for approximately 918. Results suggest that the WCI-QCUALS assessment tool performed better at differentiating among childcare settings that were consolidated into the lowest rating on the ECERS-R. Further, the WCI-QCUALS was found to be a feasible, appropriate stand-alone tool for assessing the quality of childcare centers in low-resource settings. Additional refinement and validity testing in other countries and contexts will improve the understanding of how the quality of childcare across different contexts can be measured, and improved assessment of childcare quality in low-resource settings will enhance the ability to identify low-quality care that can be remedied to ensure appropriate care for vulnerable children.

高资源环境与低资源环境下托儿所评估工具的比较。
研究表明,在低资源环境中使用专为高资源环境设计的儿童保育环境评估工具来评估和改善保育质量时,可能会出现一些问题,包括对儿童保育环境的特征给予过高的权重,而这些特征在低资源环境中可能无法获得或在文化上不合适。本研究将在低收入和低资源环境下开发的新型评估工具与在高资源环境下开发的标准化 "黄金标准 "工具进行了比较。该研究随机抽取了 34 个低资源环境下的托儿所,这些托儿所为大约 918 名儿童提供保育服务。研究结果表明,WCI-QCUALS 评估工具在区分 ECERS-R 评级最低的托儿所方面表现更好。此外,研究还发现,WCI-QCUALS 是一种可行、合适的独立工具,可用于评估资源匮乏环境中托儿所的质量。在其他国家和环境中进行进一步的完善和有效性测试,将提高人们对如何衡量不同环境下托儿所质量的认识,而改进对低资源环境下托儿所质量的评估,将提高识别低质量托儿所的能力,从而采取补救措施,确保弱势儿童得到适当的照顾。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Frontiers in Public Health
Frontiers in Public Health Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
4469
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Public Health is a multidisciplinary open-access journal which publishes rigorously peer-reviewed research and is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians, policy makers and the public worldwide. The journal aims at overcoming current fragmentation in research and publication, promoting consistency in pursuing relevant scientific themes, and supporting finding dissemination and translation into practice. Frontiers in Public Health is organized into Specialty Sections that cover different areas of research in the field. Please refer to the author guidelines for details on article types and the submission process.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信