Ensuring best practice in genomics education: A theory- and empirically informed evaluation framework.

Implementation of genomic medicine into healthcare requires a workforce educated through effective educational approaches. However, ascertaining the impact of genomics education activities or resources is limited by a lack of evaluation and inconsistent descriptions in the literature. We aim to support those developing genomics education to consider how best to capture evaluation data that demonstrate program outcomes and effectiveness within scope. Here, we present an evaluation framework that is adaptable to multiple settings for use by genomics educators with or without education or evaluation backgrounds. The framework was developed as part of a broader program supporting genomic research translation coordinated by the Australian Genomics consortium. We detail our mixed-methods approach involving an expert workshop, literature review and iterative expert input to reach consensus and synthesis of a new evaluation framework for genomics education. The resulting theory-informed and evidence-based framework encompasses evaluation across all stages of education program development, implementation and reporting, and acknowledges the critical role of stakeholders and the effects of external influences.

Ensuring best practice in genomics education and evaluation: reporting item standards for education and its evaluation in genomics (RISE2 Genomics).

PURPOSE: Widespread, quality genomics education for health professionals is required to create a competent genomic workforce. A lack of standards for reporting genomics education and evaluation limits the evidence base for replication and comparison. We therefore undertook a consensus process to develop a recommended minimum set of information to support consistent reporting of design, development, delivery, and evaluation of genomics education interventions. METHODS: Draft standards were derived from literature (25 items from 21 publications). Thirty-six international experts were purposively recruited for three rounds of a modified Delphi process to reach consensus on relevance, clarity, comprehensiveness, utility, and design. RESULTS: The final standards include 18 items relating to development and delivery of genomics education interventions, 12 relating to evaluation, and 1 on stakeholder engagement. CONCLUSION: These Reporting Item Standards for Education and its Evaluation in Genomics (RISE2 Genomics) are intended to be widely applicable across settings and health professions. Their use by those involved in reporting genomics education interventions and evaluation, as well as adoption by journals and policy makers as the expected standard, will support greater transparency, consistency, and comprehensiveness of reporting. Consequently, the genomics education evidence base will be more robust, enabling high-quality education and evaluation across diverse settings.

A Systematic Review of MicroRNA Signatures Associated with the Progression of Leukoplakia with and without Epithelial Dysplasia.

Oral cancer is a significant public health issue, being the eighth most common cancer worldwide with over 300,000 cases diagnosed annually. Early diagnosis and adequate management of oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMDs) before transformation into oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is critical to reduce deaths, morbidity, and to improve overall prognosis. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small noncoding RNAs involved in the post-transcriptional regulation of protein expression and implicated in the control of numerous cellular pathways and impacting physiological, developmental, and pathological processes. Dysregulation of miRNAs has been reported in many cancers and has been demonstrated to play a critical role in cancer initiation, progression, apoptosis, invasion and metastasis. This systematic review provides a comprehensive summary of the prevailing literature on miRNA signatures in OPMDs, specifically leukoplakia with or without oral epithelial dysplasia, and their utility in predicting malignant transformation into OSCC. Eighteen articles describing 73 unique and differentially expressed microRNAs met the criteria for inclusion in this review. We reviewed the characteristics and methodology for each of these studies and assessed the sensitivity and specificity of the studied miRNAs in predicting malignant transformation. This systematic review highlights the significant interest in miRNAs and their tremendous potential as prognostic markers for predicting the malignant transformation of OPMDs into OSCC.

Associations between Individual-level and Area-level social disadvantage and oral health behaviours in Australian adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Oral health behaviours are significant determinants of oral health. There is evidence that socioeconomic position influences oral health behaviours, but little is known about this association during adolescence. This study aims to investigate the association between social disadvantage (individual and area level) and oral health behaviours among Australian adolescents. METHODS: This study utilized data from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC). The sample consisted of 2877 adolescents. Exposure measures were area-level social disadvantage (Socioeconomic Indexes for Areas) and parent-reported household income from Wave 5. Outcomes, measured in Wave 6, were three different adolescent-reported oral health behaviours: frequency of brushing, consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) and dental visits. Associations between quintiles of each exposure and each oral health behaviour were tested by fitting multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: Household income and area-level disadvantage were associated with dental visits and brushing frequency. Associations between social disadvantage and consumption of SSBs were less apparent, with only the least disadvantaged adolescents having lower odds of consumption of SSBs compared to the most disadvantaged group. CONCLUSION: Individual and area-level socioeconomic factors are associated with dental visits, and frequency of brushing.Broad population-based strategies must be adopted to reduce intake of SSBs, however, targeted strategies are needed among more disadvantaged populations to address infrequent toothbrushing and irregular dental visits among adolescents.

Ensuring Best Practice in Genomic Education and Evaluation: A Program Logic Approach.

Targeted genomic education and training of professionals have been identified as core components of strategies and implementation plans for the use of genomics in health care systems. Education needs to be effective and support the sustained and appropriate use of genomics in health care. Evaluation of education programs to identify effectiveness is challenging. Furthermore, those responsible for development and delivery are not necessarily trained in education and/or evaluation. Program logic models have been used to support the development and evaluation of education programs by articulating a logical explanation as to how a program intends to produce the desired outcomes. These are highly relevant to genomic education programs, but do not appear to have been widely used to date. To assist those developing and evaluating genomic education programs, and as a first step towards enabling identification of effective genomic education approaches, we developed a consensus program logic model for genomic education. We drew on existing literature and a co-design process with 24 international genomic education and evaluation experts to develop the model. The general applicability of the model to the development of programs was tested by program convenors across four diverse settings. Conveners reported on the utility and relevance of the logic model across development, delivery and evaluation. As a whole, their feedback suggests that the model is flexible and adaptive across university award programs, competency development and continuing professional development activities. We discuss this program logic model as a potential best practice mechanism for developing genomic education, and to support development of an evaluation framework and consistent standards to evaluate and report genomic education program outcomes and impacts.