Caldwell Alexandria, Erickson Elizabeth, Shearman Nikki, Sharif Iman, Garbe M Connor, Tyrrell Hollyce, Needlman Robert, Dunlap Marny
University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Department of Pediatrics, Section of General and Community Pediatrics (A Caldwell, MC Garbe, and M Dunlap), Oklahoma City, Okla.
Duke University, Department of Pediatrics (E Erickson), Durham, NC.
Acad Pediatr. 2020 Sep-Oct;20(7):1013-1019. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2020.04.008. Epub 2020 Apr 15.
Despite endorsement by the American Academy of Pediatrics, there are no national data on literacy promotion (LP) training and behaviors.
To describe LP training experiences and behaviors of pediatric and internal medicine/pediatrics residents and faculty nationally, and the association between LP training and behaviors.
The Academic Pediatric Association's Continuity Research Network and Reach Out and Read National Center sent an online survey to faculty and residents at participating Continuity Research Network clinics. Respondents were asked about LP training experiences and behaviors. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and logistic regression modeling.
473 faculty and 1216 residents at 42 institutions participated. More faculty than residents reported completing online Reach Out and Read training (63% vs 45%, P < .0001). More residents reported learning in clinic from others (92% vs 89%, P = .04). Training experiences did not differ otherwise. More faculty reported providing anticipatory guidance (87% vs 77%, P < .0001); modeling shared reading (69% vs 45%, P < .0001); and using books for developmental assessment (80% vs 62%, P < .0001). Both groups (97%) reported distributing books. The training modality most often endorsed as "very/extremely influential" was learning in clinic from others. Some LP behaviors were associated more strongly with online training while others were associated more strongly with in-person training.
Online training and in-person training are both associated with high quality delivery of LP. Faculty members are more likely to have completed online training and to report engaging in the full range of recommended LP behaviors. These data have implications for LP training.
尽管得到了美国儿科学会的认可,但目前尚无关于识字促进(LP)培训及行为的全国性数据。
描述全国范围内儿科及内科/儿科住院医师和教职人员的LP培训经历及行为,以及LP培训与行为之间的关联。
学术儿科学会的连续性研究网络及“伸出援手并阅读”国家中心向参与连续性研究网络诊所的教职人员和住院医师发送了一份在线调查问卷。受访者被问及LP培训经历及行为。使用描述性统计、卡方检验和逻辑回归模型对数据进行分析。
42家机构的473名教职人员和1216名住院医师参与了调查。报告完成“伸出援手并阅读”在线培训的教职人员比住院医师更多(63%对45%,P<.0001)。更多住院医师报告在诊所向他人学习(92%对89%,P=.04)。其他方面的培训经历并无差异。更多教职人员报告提供预期指导(87%对77%,P<.0001);示范分享阅读(69%对45%,P<.0001);以及使用书籍进行发育评估(80%对62%,P<.0001)。两组(97%)均报告分发书籍。最常被认可为“非常/极其有影响力”的培训方式是在诊所向他人学习。一些LP行为与在线培训的关联更强,而另一些则与面对面培训的关联更强。
在线培训和面对面培训均与高质量的LP实施相关。教职人员更有可能完成在线培训并报告参与了一系列推荐的LP行为。这些数据对LP培训具有启示意义。