RESUMEN
The health promotion literature that considers how scientific evidence can be effectively communicated tends to focus on evaluating the effectiveness of communication materials. This has resulted in a knowledge gap regarding effective knowledge translation processes. This study explores the process, reasoning and practices for developing books for children that incorporate evidence-based information to aid understanding of scientific evidence about health and environmental or natural disasters. This study is informed by a systematic review of the literature combined with responses to an email interview with authors of books for children. Nine published studies were included in the systematic review. Twenty-two authors responded to the email survey (25% response rate, following 86 invitations). We report seven key findings to guide the development of health-promoting books for children: (i) understand the needs and expectations of the audience, (ii) articulate the topic and research evidence, (iii) assemble a team with a mix of content knowledge and creative expertise, (iv) format should be chosen to suit the user group and guided by the creative team, (v) early testing with children and their support system is crucial, (vi) develop a dissemination strategy to reach the user group and (vii) engage in reflexivity through evaluation of effectiveness of messaging. The current investigation can guide the process, reasoning and practice of developing books for children that incorporate evidence about health and environmental disasters.
Asunto(s)
Libros , Promoción de la Salud , Humanos , Niño , Promoción de la Salud/métodos , Investigadores , Investigación Biomédica TraslacionalRESUMEN
Knowledge tests used to evaluate child protection training program effectiveness for early childhood education providers may suffer from threats to construct validity given the contextual variability inherent within state-specific regulations around mandated reporting requirements. Unfortunately, guidance on instrument revision that accounts for such state-specific mandated reporting requirements is lacking across research on evaluation practices. This study, therefore, explored how collection and integration of validity evidence using a mixed methods framework can guide the instrument revision process to arrive at a more valid program outcome measure.