Kumah Elizabeth A, Mgawadere Florence, Ladur Alice, Suleiman Zainab, Sanyang Yusupha, White Sarah A, Furtado Nicholas, Egere Uzochukwu, Ameh Charles
Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, International Public Health Liverpool UK.
The Global Fund Geneva Switzerland.
Campbell Syst Rev. 2025 Mar 11;21(1):e70028. doi: 10.1002/cl2.70028. eCollection 2025 Mar.
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 The primary objective of this systematic review is to evaluate and synthesise both published and unpublished literature on the effectiveness of sexual and reproductive health blended learning approaches for capacity strengthening of healthcare practitioners in LMICs.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)?
这是一项坎贝尔系统评价的方案。目标如下。本系统评价的主要目标是评估并综合已发表和未发表的关于性与生殖健康混合学习方法对中低收入国家医疗从业者能力建设有效性的文献。在此背景下,性与生殖健康干预是指以下旨在改善孕产妇和新生儿健康的四项关键干预措施或服务中的任何一项(斯塔尔斯等人,2018年):(a) 产前、分娩和产后护理,包括紧急产科和新生儿护理;(b) 安全堕胎服务及不安全堕胎并发症的治疗;(c) 预防和治疗孕妇疟疾、结核病、艾滋病毒及其他性传播感染;(d) 计划生育。在本系统评价中,混合学习被定义为将面对面学习与电子学习或在线学习相结合的任何教学方法。面对面和在线学习的组成部分可能包括阿拉马里(2019年)确定的任何组成部分:(1) 面对面教师主导,学生参加课程,教师展示教学材料,学生参与度较低;(2) 面对面协作,学生在课堂上一起学习,例如在讨论小组中;(3) 在线教师主导,教学通过在线方式进行,由教师把控进度(如虚拟教室);(4) 在线协作,学生与同龄人在线合作,例如在线学习社区;(5) 在线自主学习,学生按照自己的节奏和时间,在自己选择的地点学习,例如观看视频、在线阅读。具体而言,本系统评价将回答以下研究问题:(1) 中低收入国家使用了哪些性与生殖健康混合学习方法?(2) 仅参与性与生殖健康混合学习干预(即与无干预相比)是否能改善中低收入国家医护人员有效提供护理的情况?(3) 与非混合学习方法(如传统面对面学习或纯电子学习)相比,参与性与生殖健康混合学习干预是否有助于中低收入国家医护人员有效提供护理(例如通过有效孕产妇和新生儿护理的自我报告来衡量)?(4) 与非混合学习方法(即面对面学习或电子学习)相比,性与生殖健康混合学习的成本效益如何?(5) 哪些因素影响性与生殖健康混合学习干预的有效性(例如参与者特征、干预类型、课程内容、环境和授课方式)?(6) 针对中低收入国家医护人员的性与生殖健康混合学习干预是否能改善患者结局(例如降低孕产妇和新生儿死亡率、患者满意度报告)?