Development and validity of a method for the evaluation of printed education material

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Castro, Mauro Silveira de
Data de Publicação: 2007
Outros Autores: Pilger, Diogo, Fuchs, Flávio Danni, Ferreira, Maria Beatriz Cardoso
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UFRGS
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10183/61351
Resumo: Objectives: To develop and study the validity of an instrument for evaluation of Printed Education Materials (PEM); to evaluate the use of acceptability indices; to identify possible influences of professional aspects. Methods: An instrument for PEM evaluation was developed which included tree steps: domain identification, item generation and instrument design. A reading to easy PEM was developed for education of patient with systemic hypertension and its treatment with hydrochlorothiazide. Construct validity was measured based on previously established errors purposively introduced into the PEM, which served as extreme groups. An acceptability index was applied taking into account the rate of professionals who should approve each item. Participants were 10 physicians (9 men) and 5 nurses (all women). Results: Many professionals identified intentional errors of crude character. Few participants identified errors that needed more careful evaluation, and no one detected the intentional error that required literature analysis. Physicians considered as acceptable 95.8% of the items of the PEM, and nurses 29.2%. The differences between the scoring were statistically significant in 27% of the items. In the overall evaluation, 66.6% were considered as acceptable. The analysis of each item revealed a behavioral pattern for each professional group. Conclusions: The use of instruments for evaluation of printed education materials is required and may improve the quality of the PEM available for the patients. Not always are the acceptability indices totally correct or represent high quality of information. The professional experience, the practice pattern, and perhaps the gendre of the reviewers may influence their evaluation. An analysis of the PEM by professionals in communication, in drug information, and patients should be carried out to improve the quality of the proposed material.
id UFRGS-2_e74b6dbac00e6a1a60250e0dff103e92
oai_identifier_str oai:www.lume.ufrgs.br:10183/61351
network_acronym_str UFRGS-2
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UFRGS
repository_id_str
spelling Castro, Mauro Silveira dePilger, DiogoFuchs, Flávio DanniFerreira, Maria Beatriz Cardoso2012-11-24T01:43:30Z20071886-3655http://hdl.handle.net/10183/61351000607357Objectives: To develop and study the validity of an instrument for evaluation of Printed Education Materials (PEM); to evaluate the use of acceptability indices; to identify possible influences of professional aspects. Methods: An instrument for PEM evaluation was developed which included tree steps: domain identification, item generation and instrument design. A reading to easy PEM was developed for education of patient with systemic hypertension and its treatment with hydrochlorothiazide. Construct validity was measured based on previously established errors purposively introduced into the PEM, which served as extreme groups. An acceptability index was applied taking into account the rate of professionals who should approve each item. Participants were 10 physicians (9 men) and 5 nurses (all women). Results: Many professionals identified intentional errors of crude character. Few participants identified errors that needed more careful evaluation, and no one detected the intentional error that required literature analysis. Physicians considered as acceptable 95.8% of the items of the PEM, and nurses 29.2%. The differences between the scoring were statistically significant in 27% of the items. In the overall evaluation, 66.6% were considered as acceptable. The analysis of each item revealed a behavioral pattern for each professional group. Conclusions: The use of instruments for evaluation of printed education materials is required and may improve the quality of the PEM available for the patients. Not always are the acceptability indices totally correct or represent high quality of information. The professional experience, the practice pattern, and perhaps the gendre of the reviewers may influence their evaluation. An analysis of the PEM by professionals in communication, in drug information, and patients should be carried out to improve the quality of the proposed material.Objetivos: Desarrollar y estudiar la validez de un instrumento para la evaluación del material educativo impreso (MEI); evaluar el uso de los índices de aceptabilidad; identificar las posibles influencias de los aspectos profesionales. Métodos: Se desarrolló un instrumento para evaluación del MEI en tres pasos: identificación de dominios, generación de ítems y diseño del instrumento. Se desarrolló un MEI fácil de leer para la educación de pacientes con hipertensión sistémica y su tratamiento con hidroclorotiazida. Se midió la validez del instrumento mediante los errores previamente introducidos a propósito en el MEI, lo que sirvió de grupo extremo. Se aplicó un índice de aceptabilidad teniendo en cuenta la tasa de profesionales que tenía que aprobar cada ítem. Participaron 10 médicos (9 hombres) y 5 enfermeras (todas mujeres). Resultados: Muchos profesionales identificaron los errores intencionales de carácter crudo. Pocos participantes identificaron los errores que necesitaban una evaluación más cuidadosa, y ninguno identificó el error intencional que requería análisis de la literatura. Los médicos consideraron aceptable el 95,8% de los ítems del MEI y las enfermeras el 29,2%. Las diferencias de puntuación fueron estadísticamente significativas en el 27% de los ítems. En la evaluación total, el 66,6% fue considerado aceptable. El análisis de cada ítem reveló un modelo de comportamiento para cada grupo de profesionales. Conclusiones: Es necesario el uso de instrumentos para la evaluación de materiales educativos impresos y puede mejorar la calidad de los MEI disponibles para los pacientes. Los índices de aceptabilidad no son siempre totalmente correctos ni representan la calida de la información. La experiencia profesional, el modelo de ejercicio, y quizás el género de los revisores puede influir en la evaluación. Debería realizarse un análisis de los MEI por profesionales de comunicación, de la información sobre medicamentos y por pacientes para mejorar la calidad del material propuesto.application/pdfengPharmacy practice. [S.l.]. Vol. 5, no. 2 (Apr./June 2007), p. 89-94Material educativo impressoHipertensão arterialHidroclorotiazidaEducação de pacientesPatient EducationComprehensionValidation studiesBrazilEducación de pacientesComprensiónEstudios de validaciónDevelopment and validity of a method for the evaluation of printed education materialEstrangeiroinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRGSinstname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)instacron:UFRGSORIGINAL000607357.pdf000607357.pdfTexto completo (inglês)application/pdf55466http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/61351/1/000607357.pdffeade9bb73760c9181de94cd8ec8a97aMD51TEXT000607357.pdf.txt000607357.pdf.txtExtracted Texttext/plain30737http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/61351/2/000607357.pdf.txte6709099babb258a9cba28ba59b8d85bMD52THUMBNAIL000607357.pdf.jpg000607357.pdf.jpgGenerated Thumbnailimage/jpeg1709http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/61351/3/000607357.pdf.jpgcd8484cd3936923fc13c88887f6dbd0fMD5310183/613512021-08-18 04:42:09.252455oai:www.lume.ufrgs.br:10183/61351Repositório de PublicaçõesPUBhttps://lume.ufrgs.br/oai/requestopendoar:2021-08-18T07:42:09Repositório Institucional da UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)false
dc.title.pt_BR.fl_str_mv Development and validity of a method for the evaluation of printed education material
title Development and validity of a method for the evaluation of printed education material
spellingShingle Development and validity of a method for the evaluation of printed education material
Castro, Mauro Silveira de
Material educativo impresso
Hipertensão arterial
Hidroclorotiazida
Educação de pacientes
Patient Education
Comprehension
Validation studies
Brazil
Educación de pacientes
Comprensión
Estudios de validación
title_short Development and validity of a method for the evaluation of printed education material
title_full Development and validity of a method for the evaluation of printed education material
title_fullStr Development and validity of a method for the evaluation of printed education material
title_full_unstemmed Development and validity of a method for the evaluation of printed education material
title_sort Development and validity of a method for the evaluation of printed education material
author Castro, Mauro Silveira de
author_facet Castro, Mauro Silveira de
Pilger, Diogo
Fuchs, Flávio Danni
Ferreira, Maria Beatriz Cardoso
author_role author
author2 Pilger, Diogo
Fuchs, Flávio Danni
Ferreira, Maria Beatriz Cardoso
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Castro, Mauro Silveira de
Pilger, Diogo
Fuchs, Flávio Danni
Ferreira, Maria Beatriz Cardoso
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Material educativo impresso
Hipertensão arterial
Hidroclorotiazida
Educação de pacientes
topic Material educativo impresso
Hipertensão arterial
Hidroclorotiazida
Educação de pacientes
Patient Education
Comprehension
Validation studies
Brazil
Educación de pacientes
Comprensión
Estudios de validación
dc.subject.eng.fl_str_mv Patient Education
Comprehension
Validation studies
Brazil
dc.subject.spa.fl_str_mv Educación de pacientes
Comprensión
Estudios de validación
description Objectives: To develop and study the validity of an instrument for evaluation of Printed Education Materials (PEM); to evaluate the use of acceptability indices; to identify possible influences of professional aspects. Methods: An instrument for PEM evaluation was developed which included tree steps: domain identification, item generation and instrument design. A reading to easy PEM was developed for education of patient with systemic hypertension and its treatment with hydrochlorothiazide. Construct validity was measured based on previously established errors purposively introduced into the PEM, which served as extreme groups. An acceptability index was applied taking into account the rate of professionals who should approve each item. Participants were 10 physicians (9 men) and 5 nurses (all women). Results: Many professionals identified intentional errors of crude character. Few participants identified errors that needed more careful evaluation, and no one detected the intentional error that required literature analysis. Physicians considered as acceptable 95.8% of the items of the PEM, and nurses 29.2%. The differences between the scoring were statistically significant in 27% of the items. In the overall evaluation, 66.6% were considered as acceptable. The analysis of each item revealed a behavioral pattern for each professional group. Conclusions: The use of instruments for evaluation of printed education materials is required and may improve the quality of the PEM available for the patients. Not always are the acceptability indices totally correct or represent high quality of information. The professional experience, the practice pattern, and perhaps the gendre of the reviewers may influence their evaluation. An analysis of the PEM by professionals in communication, in drug information, and patients should be carried out to improve the quality of the proposed material.
publishDate 2007
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv 2007
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv 2012-11-24T01:43:30Z
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv Estrangeiro
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10183/61351
dc.identifier.issn.pt_BR.fl_str_mv 1886-3655
dc.identifier.nrb.pt_BR.fl_str_mv 000607357
identifier_str_mv 1886-3655
000607357
url http://hdl.handle.net/10183/61351
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.ispartof.pt_BR.fl_str_mv Pharmacy practice. [S.l.]. Vol. 5, no. 2 (Apr./June 2007), p. 89-94
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRGS
instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)
instacron:UFRGS
instname_str Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)
instacron_str UFRGS
institution UFRGS
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UFRGS
collection Repositório Institucional da UFRGS
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/61351/1/000607357.pdf
http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/61351/2/000607357.pdf.txt
http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/61351/3/000607357.pdf.jpg
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv feade9bb73760c9181de94cd8ec8a97a
e6709099babb258a9cba28ba59b8d85b
cd8484cd3936923fc13c88887f6dbd0f
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv MD5
MD5
MD5
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1798487168903020544