Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Artículo científico |
| Language: | en |
| Published: |
Centro de investigaciones y Publicaciones Farmacéuticas
2007
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=69050207 https://www.redalyc.org/journal/690/69050207/ https://www.redalyc.org/journal/690/69050207/html/ https://www.redalyc.org/journal/690/69050207/69050207.epub https://www.redalyc.org/journal/690/69050207/movil |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Table of Contents:
- Development and validity of a method for the evaluation of printed education material Mauro Silveira de Castro Diogo Pilger Flávio Danni Fuchs Maria Beatriz Cardoso Ferreira Medicina Brazil Comprehension Patient Education Validation studies Objectives: To develop and study the validity of aninstrument for evaluation of Printed EducationMaterials (PEM); to evaluate the use of acceptabilityindices; to identify possible influences ofprofessional aspects.Methods: An instrument for PEM evaluation wasdeveloped which included tree steps: domainidentification, item generation and instrumentdesign. A reading to easy PEM was developed foreducation of patient with systemic hypertension andits treatment with hydrochlorothiazide. Constructvalidity was measured based on previouslyestablished errors purposively introduced into thePEM, which served as extreme groups. Anacceptability index was applied taking into accountthe rate of professionals who should approve eachitem. Participants were 10 physicians (9 men) and 5nurses (all women).Results: Many professionals identified intentionalerrors of crude character. Few participants identifiederrors that needed more careful evaluation, and noone detected the intentional error that requiredliterature analysis. Physicians considered asacceptable 95.8% of the items of the PEM, andnurses 29.2%. The differences between the scoringwere statistically significant in 27% of the items. Inthe overall evaluation, 66.6% were considered asacceptable. The analysis of each item revealed abehavioral pattern for each professional group.Conclusions: The use of instruments for evaluationof printed education materials is required and mayimprove the quality of the PEM available for thepatients. Not always are the acceptability indicestotally correct or represent high quality ofinformation. The professional experience, thepractice pattern, and perhaps the gendre of thereviewers may influence their evaluation. Ananalysis of the PEM by professionals in communication, in drug information, and patientsshould be carried out to improve the quality of theproposed material. 2007 artículo científico 1885-642X https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=69050207 https://www.redalyc.org/journal/690/69050207/ https://www.redalyc.org/journal/690/69050207/html/ https://www.redalyc.org/journal/690/69050207/69050207.epub https://www.redalyc.org/journal/690/69050207/movil en http://www.redalyc.org/revista.oa?id=690 Pharmacy Practice application/pdf Centro de investigaciones y Publicaciones Farmacéuticas Pharmacy Practice (España) Num.2 Vol.5