How Do Field Epidemiologists Learn? A Protocol For A Qualitative Inquiry Into Learning In Field Epidemiology Training Programs
Griffith, M. M.; Field, E.; Huang, A. S.-E.; Shimada, T.; Battsend, M.; Housen, T.; Pamphilon, B.; Kirk, M. D.
Show abstract
IntroductionCOVID-19 underscored the importance of field epidemiology training programs (FETP) as countries struggled with overwhelming demands. Experts are calling for more field epidemiologists with better training. Since 1951 FETP have been building public health capacities across the globe, yet explorations of learning in these programs are lacking. This qualitative study will 1) describe approaches to training field epidemiologists in FETP; 2) describe strategies for learning field epidemiology among FETP trainees; and 3) explain the principles and practices aligning training approaches with learning strategies in FETP. Methods and analysisThe research design, implementation, and interpretation are collaborative efforts with FETP trainers. Data collection will include interviews with FETP trainers and trainees and participant observations of FETP training and learning events in four FETP in the Western Pacific Region. Data analysis will occur in three phases: I) we will use the constant comparison method of Charmazs grounded theory during open coding to identify and prioritise categories and properties in the data; II) during focused coding, we will use constant comparison and Polkinghornes analysis of narratives, comparing stories of prioritized categories, to fill out properties of those categories; III) we will use Polkinghornes narrative analysis to construct narratives that reflect domains of interest, identifying correspondence among Carr and Kemmiss practices, understandings, and situations to explain principles and processes of learning in FETP. Ethics and disseminationWe have obtained the required ethics approvals to conduct this research at The Australian National University (2021/771) and Taiwans Ministry of Health and Welfare (112206). Data will not be available publicly, but anonymised findings will be shared with FETP for collaborative interpretation. Ultimately, findings and interpretations will appear in peer reviewed journals and conferences. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDYO_LIThis study will be co-designed, co-developed, and co-interpreted with practitioners to generate relevant, useful, and informative findings for field epidemiology training programs, practitioners, and learners. C_LIO_LIUse of multiple data collection methods and theoretical frameworks will improve the credibility of the findings. C_LIO_LIEngagement of participants and programs throughout the process to check interpretations and facilitate dialogue on findings will strengthen the trustworthiness of the findings. C_LIO_LIThe methodology aims to explore experiences in depth, and resources restrict the number of programs and participants that may enrol. So, there will be limits to the generalizability of the findings beyond the included programs. C_LIO_LIAs grounded theory aims for hypothesis generation not hypothesis testing, the findings will be limited to explanations of training and learning and thus not interpretable as statements of the effectiveness of training approaches or programs. C_LI
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Comprehensive profiling of social mixing patterns in resource poor countries: a mixed methods research protocol 95%
- “Putting the power back into community”: A mixed methods evaluation of a chronic hepatitis B training course for the Aboriginal health workforce of Australia’s Northern Territory 95%
- Process of Use of Evidence Products by Frontline Maternal, Newborn and Child Health Staff at the Facility Level in Ghana. 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- How can rural community-engaged health services planning affect sustainable health care system changes? - A process description and qualitative analysis of data from the Rural Coordination Centre of British Columbia’s Rural Site Visits Project 95%
- Implementation Science Protocol for a participatory, theory-informed implementation research programme in the context of health system strengthening in sub-Saharan Africa (ASSET-ImplementER) 95%
- Development and validation protocol for an instrument to measure women’s empowerment in urban sanitation across countries: The Agency, Resources, and Institutional Structures for Sanitation-related Empowerment (ARISE) Scales 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Improving capacity for advanced training in obstetric surgery: Evaluation of a blended learning approach 94%
- Participant perceptions of disability training for health workers: a qualitative study in Ghana 94%
- Effect of introducing interprofessional education concepts on students of various healthcare disciplines in the United Arab Emirates 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Comparing in-person, blended and virtual training interventions; a real-world evaluation of HIV capacity building programs in 16 countries in sub-Saharan Africa 95%
- Perceptions of barriers and facilitators for cervical cancer screening from women and healthcare workers in Ghana: Applying the Dynamic Sustainability Framework 95%
- Who participates in ‘participatory design’ of WASH infrastructure: a mixed-methods process evaluation 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Rising Through the Pandemic: A scoping review of quality improvement in public health during the COVID-19 pandemic 94%
- Community Perceptions of Vaccination Among Influential Stakeholders: Qualitative Research in Rural India 93%
- COVID-19 Prevention at Institutions of Higher Education, United States, 2020 – 2021: Implementation of Nonpharmaceutical Interventions 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.