IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Elizabeth A. Kumah, Florence Mgawadere, Alice Ladur, Zainab Suleiman, Yusupha Sanyang, Sarah A. White, Nicholas Furtado, Uzochukwu Egere, Charles Ameh
{"title":"Protocol: Effectiveness of Sexual and Reproductive Health Blended Learning Approaches for Capacity Strengthening of Health Professionals in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review","authors":"Elizabeth A. Kumah,&nbsp;Florence Mgawadere,&nbsp;Alice Ladur,&nbsp;Zainab Suleiman,&nbsp;Yusupha Sanyang,&nbsp;Sarah A. White,&nbsp;Nicholas Furtado,&nbsp;Uzochukwu Egere,&nbsp;Charles Ameh","doi":"10.1002/cl2.70028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The primary objective of this systematic review is to evaluate and synthesise both published and unpublished literature on the effectiveness of sexual and reproductive health blended learning approaches for capacity strengthening of healthcare practitioners in LMICs. Within this context, sexual and reproductive health interventions refer to any of the following four key interventions or services aimed at improving maternal and newborn health (Starrs et al. 2018): (a) antenatal, childbirth and postnatal care, including emergency obstetric and newborn care, (b) safe abortion services and treatment of the complications of unsafe abortion, (c) prevention and treatment of malaria, tuberculosis, HIV and other sexually transmitted infections in pregnant women and d) family planning. In this systematic review, blended learning is defined as any teaching and learning method that combines face-to-face learning with e-learning or online learning. The component of face-to-face and online learning may include any of the components identified by Alammary (2019): (1) face-to-face instructor-led, where students attend a class and an instructor presents teaching and learning materials, with little engagement from students; (2) face-to-face collaboration, where students work together in class, for example, in discussion groups; (3) online instructor-led, where instruction is delivered online and facilitated by an instructor who sets the pace (e.g., virtual classrooms); (4) online collaboration, where students work together online with their peers, for example, online learning communities; and (5) online self-paced, where students study at their own pace and time, and from their chosen location, for example, watching videos, online reading. Specifically, this systematic review will answer the following research questions: (1) What sexual and reproductive health blended learning approaches have been used in LMICs? (2) Does participating in sexual and reproductive health blended learning interventions alone (i.e., compared with no intervention) improve the effective provision of care among healthcare workers in LMICs? (3) Does participating in sexual and reproductive health blended learning interventions compared with non-blended learning approaches (such as conventional face-to-face learning or pure e-learning) facilitate the effective provision of care among healthcare workers in LMICs (measured by, e.g., self-reports of effective maternal and neonatal care)? (4) What is the cost-effectiveness of sexual and reproductive health blended learning compared with non-blended learning approaches (i.e., face-to-face learning or e-learning)? (5) What factors affect the effectiveness of sexual and reproductive health blended learning interventions (e.g., characteristics of participants, type of intervention, course content, setting and mode of delivery)? (6) Do sexual and reproductive health blended learning interventions targeted at healthcare practitioners working in LMICs lead to improvement in patient outcomes (e.g., reduced maternal and neonatal mortality, patient satisfaction reports)?</p>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.70028","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cl2.70028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这是坎贝尔系统综述的协议。目标如下。本系统综述的主要目的是评估和综合已发表和未发表的文献,这些文献涉及性与生殖健康混合学习方法对加强低收入和中等收入国家医疗保健从业人员能力的有效性。在此背景下,性与生殖健康干预措施是指以下四种旨在改善孕产妇和新生儿健康的关键干预措施或服务中的任何一种(Starrs 等,2018 年):(a) 产前、分娩和产后护理,包括产科急诊和新生儿护理;(b) 安全堕胎服务和不安全堕胎并发症的治疗;(c) 预防和治疗孕妇疟疾、结核病、艾滋病毒和其他性传播感染;(d) 计划生育。在本系统综述中,混合式学习被定义为将面授学习与电子学习或在线学习相结合的任何教学方法。面授和在线学习的组成部分可包括 Alammary(2019 年)确定的任何组成部分:(1) 面授教师主导型,即学生听课,教师展示教学和学习材料,学生很少参与;(2) 面授协作型,即学生在课堂上一起学习,例如,在讨论小组中学习;(3) 在线教师主导型,即教学在网上进行,由教师设定进度(例如,虚拟教室);(4) 在线教师主导型,即教学在网上进行,由教师设定进度(例如,虚拟教室);(5) 在线教师主导型,即教学在网上进行,由教师设定进度(例如,虚拟教室);(6) 在线教师主导型,即教学在网上进行,由教师设定进度(例如,虚拟教室)、例如,虚拟教室);(4) 在线协作,学生与同伴一起在线学习,例如,在线学习社区;(5) 在线自定进度,学生按照自己的进度和时间,在自己选择的地点学习,例如,观看视频、在线阅读。具体而言,本系统综述将回答以下研究问题:(1) 在低收入和中等收入国家采用了哪些性与生殖健康混合学习方法?(2) 仅参加性与生殖健康混合学习干预(即与不参加干预相比)是否能改善低收入与中等收入国家医护人员有效提供护理的情况?(3) 与非混合式学习方法(如传统的面对面学习或纯电子学习)相比,参与性与生殖健康混合式学习干预是否有助于在低收入和中等收入国家的医护人员中有效地提供护理(通过有效的孕产妇和新生儿护理的自我报告等来衡量)?(4) 与非混合式学习方法(即面授学习或电子学习)相比,性与生殖健康混合式学习的成本效益如何?(5) 哪些因素会影响性与生殖健康混合学习干预措施的效果(如参与者的特征、干预措施的类型、课程内容、环境和授课方式)?(6) 针对在低收入和中等收入国家工作的医疗从业人员的性与生殖健康混合学习干预措施是否能改善患者的治疗效果(如降低孕产妇和新生儿死亡率、患者满意度报告)?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Protocol: Effectiveness of Sexual and Reproductive Health Blended Learning Approaches for Capacity Strengthening of Health Professionals in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review

Protocol: Effectiveness of Sexual and Reproductive Health Blended Learning Approaches for Capacity Strengthening of Health Professionals in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The primary objective of this systematic review is to evaluate and synthesise both published and unpublished literature on the effectiveness of sexual and reproductive health blended learning approaches for capacity strengthening of healthcare practitioners in LMICs. Within this context, sexual and reproductive health interventions refer to any of the following four key interventions or services aimed at improving maternal and newborn health (Starrs et al. 2018): (a) antenatal, childbirth and postnatal care, including emergency obstetric and newborn care, (b) safe abortion services and treatment of the complications of unsafe abortion, (c) prevention and treatment of malaria, tuberculosis, HIV and other sexually transmitted infections in pregnant women and d) family planning. In this systematic review, blended learning is defined as any teaching and learning method that combines face-to-face learning with e-learning or online learning. The component of face-to-face and online learning may include any of the components identified by Alammary (2019): (1) face-to-face instructor-led, where students attend a class and an instructor presents teaching and learning materials, with little engagement from students; (2) face-to-face collaboration, where students work together in class, for example, in discussion groups; (3) online instructor-led, where instruction is delivered online and facilitated by an instructor who sets the pace (e.g., virtual classrooms); (4) online collaboration, where students work together online with their peers, for example, online learning communities; and (5) online self-paced, where students study at their own pace and time, and from their chosen location, for example, watching videos, online reading. Specifically, this systematic review will answer the following research questions: (1) What sexual and reproductive health blended learning approaches have been used in LMICs? (2) Does participating in sexual and reproductive health blended learning interventions alone (i.e., compared with no intervention) improve the effective provision of care among healthcare workers in LMICs? (3) Does participating in sexual and reproductive health blended learning interventions compared with non-blended learning approaches (such as conventional face-to-face learning or pure e-learning) facilitate the effective provision of care among healthcare workers in LMICs (measured by, e.g., self-reports of effective maternal and neonatal care)? (4) What is the cost-effectiveness of sexual and reproductive health blended learning compared with non-blended learning approaches (i.e., face-to-face learning or e-learning)? (5) What factors affect the effectiveness of sexual and reproductive health blended learning interventions (e.g., characteristics of participants, type of intervention, course content, setting and mode of delivery)? (6) Do sexual and reproductive health blended learning interventions targeted at healthcare practitioners working in LMICs lead to improvement in patient outcomes (e.g., reduced maternal and neonatal mortality, patient satisfaction reports)?

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Campbell Systematic Reviews Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
21.90%
发文量
80
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
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