FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4200364457> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4200364457 endingPage "963" @default.
• W4200364457 startingPage "962" @default.
• W4200364457 abstract "The lack of standards for reporting genomicseducation (and evaluation) is a gap in the literature that limits the evidence base for replication and comparison across educational interventions. Indeed, educational interventions are inconsistently described and reported in the literature. To address this gap, Nisselle et al1Nisselle A. Janinski M. Martyn M. et al.Ensuring best practice in genomics education and evaluation: reporting item standards for education and its evaluation in genomics (RISE2 Genomics).Genet Med. 2021; 23: 1356-1365https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-021-01140-xGoogle Scholar performed a structured scoping review to identify an initial item bank to chronicle the terms used to describe educational interventions and/or metrics used for evaluating outcomes and categorized items according to the logic model (ie, planning, development, engagement, and evaluation). Subsequently, a rigorous, iterative Delphi process was employed by drawing on the expertise of 38 international (ie, 11 countries, 5 continents) experts from diverse backgrounds to identify essential final standards (n = 31 items within the 4 logic model categories). The report1Nisselle A. Janinski M. Martyn M. et al.Ensuring best practice in genomics education and evaluation: reporting item standards for education and its evaluation in genomics (RISE2 Genomics).Genet Med. 2021; 23: 1356-1365https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-021-01140-xGoogle Scholar cited 3 key findings: (1) the level of detail regarding the study design of genomic education interventions in the literature has been highly variable, (2) few studies have used a theoretical framework to guide the educational intervention or its evaluation, and (3) studies on educational interventions often lack clarity and a detailed description of metrics/evaluation. Study findings and subsequent Delphi process advance the field by creating a framework supporting quality reporting in genomics education and evaluation, thereby facilitating transparency and appraisal of interventions. A critical aspect of the work was the inclusion of diverse international expertise spanning general and genomic education for health professionals, thereby supporting generalizability. A key innovative aspect of reporting item standards for education and its evaluation in genomics (RISE2 Genomics) is the inclusion of individuals with a strong background in evaluation, which has been lacking in previous work. The need to integrate genomics into health care education and practice is a global responsibility requiring a concerted international effort to create a roadmap for sharing strategies, standards, and data to accelerate implementation.2Stark Z. Dolman L. Manolio T.A. et al.Integrating genomics into healthcare: a global responsibility.Am J Hum Genet. 2019; 104: 13-20https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2018.11.014Google Scholar A number of recent publications similarly highlight gaps in implementing genomics into health care provider education/practice in the fields of medicine,3Dasgupta S. Feldman G.L. Powell C.M. et al.Training the next generation of genomic medicine providers: trends in medical education and national assessment.Genet Med. 2020; 22: 1718-1722https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-020-0855-9Google Scholar pharmacy,4Gammal RS, Lee YM, Petry NJ, et al. Pharmacists leading the way to precision medicine: updates to the core pharmacist competencies in genomics. Am J Pharm Educ. Published online July 16, 2021. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe8634.Google Scholar and nursing.5Calzone K.A. Kirk M. Tonkin E. Badzek L. Benjamin C. Middleton A. The global landscape of nursing and genomics.J Nurs Scholarsh. 2018; 50: 249-256https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12380Google Scholar Common barriers across disciplines include aspects relating to clinical practice, education/training, research, and policy. In clinical practice, health care systems are challenged to develop workforce competency in practicing clinicians (ie, diffusion of innovation, developing practice champions barriers). In educational settings, faculty lacking genomic competencies has impeded implementation of genomics into health care education curricula (ie, training the trainer barriers). For research, there is a lack of valid and reliable measures to evaluate genomic education (ie, measurement barriers). In the policy arena, efforts are needed to incorporate genomic competencies into certification examinations to ensure that institutions are educating and training clinicians with genomic competencies. Given the multifaceted aspects of genomics education, activities to develop genomic competencies can be considered a complex intervention. There is a considerable body of literature supporting that theory-informed complex interventions are more effective than theoretical models. As such, the United Kingdom Medical Research Council advocates drawing on existing theories/frameworks when developing and implementing complex interventions.6O’Cathain A. Croot L. Duncan E. et al.Guidance on how to develop complex interventions to improve health and healthcare.BMJ Open. 2019; 9e029954https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029954Google Scholar To this point, the RISE2 Genomics group noted only 3 studies of educational interventions/evaluation that were guided by a theoretical framework. The RISE2 Genomics standards not only serve to guide the development (and review) of genomics education interventions but also their evaluation. The 31-point structure of RISE2 Genomics was established using a rigorous process and promotes transparency in comparison across studies. As such, RISE2 Genomics standards represent a critical step for establishing an evidence base and determining best practices for training competent health care professionals to meet the growing demand for genomic health care. The work of Nisselle et al1Nisselle A. Janinski M. Martyn M. et al.Ensuring best practice in genomics education and evaluation: reporting item standards for education and its evaluation in genomics (RISE2 Genomics).Genet Med. 2021; 23: 1356-1365https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-021-01140-xGoogle Scholar closely aligns with the ongoing efforts of the Global Genomics Nursing Alliance (G2NA). The organization was founded in 2017 and aims to raise the profile of nursing in genomic health care and advocates capacity building for nurses to deliver genomic health care for all. Evidence based practice is a key strand of G2NA’s strategic plan (2020-2023). In particular, G2NA supports the importance of developing standardized implementation and measurement of workforce capacity building and academic preparation of nurses with genomic competencies. Work to date includes a comprehensive charting of global genomic resources,7Calzone K.A. Kirk M. Tonkin E. Badzek L. Benjamin C. Middleton A. Increasing nursing capacity in genomics: overview of existing global genomics resources.Nurse Educ Today. 2018; 69: 53-59https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2018.06.032Google Scholar developing a roadmap for implementing genomics into nursing,8Tonkin E. Calzone K.A. Badzek L. et al.A roadmap for global acceleration of genomics integration across nursing.J Nurs Scholarsh. 2020; 52: 329-338https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12552Google Scholar and collaboratively creating a maturity matrix for nurse leaders (champions) to facilitate and benchmark progress in implementing genomic health care policy, infrastructure, education, and delivery.9Tonkin E. Calzone K.A. Badzek L. et al.A maturity matrix for nurse leaders to facilitate and benchmark progress in genomic healthcare policy, infrastructure, education, and delivery.J Nurs Scholarsh. 2020; 52: 583-592https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12586Google Scholar Currently, G2NA is finalizing a global genomics nursing competency framework that includes nurses at all levels of practice. This is critical for meeting the burgeoning demand for genomic health care because nurses are the most numerous of all trained health care professionals. Moreover, these complementary G2NA projects have all been guided by the diffusion of innovation theory, providing a structured theoretical framework. As such, we are heartened to see the rigorous approach employed by the RISE2 Genomics group. The leadership of G2NA fully endorses the framework put forth by Nisselle et al1Nisselle A. Janinski M. Martyn M. et al.Ensuring best practice in genomics education and evaluation: reporting item standards for education and its evaluation in genomics (RISE2 Genomics).Genet Med. 2021; 23: 1356-1365https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-021-01140-xGoogle Scholar and agrees that efforts are needed to advance harmonized work and build an evidence base for genomic education interventions and their evaluation. In addition, G2NA endorses the development of structured reporting guidelines (ie, Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research Network) as a priority to help further advance the state of the science for genomic education interventions and best practices in the field. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. Response to Dwyer et alGenetics in MedicineVol. 24Issue 4PreviewWe thank Dwyer et al for their thoughtful commentary1 on our paper, “Ensuring best practice in genomics education and evaluation: reporting item standards for education and its evaluation in genomics (RISE2 Genomics).”2 Their correspondence highlights broader efforts across disciplines to develop an evidence base for best practice in genomics education and evaluation using the work of the Global Genomics Nursing Alliance3 as an exemplar. Full-Text PDF" @default.
• W4200364457 created "2021-12-31" @default.
• W4200364457 creator A5020472555 @default.
• W4200364457 creator A5033298715 @default.
• W4200364457 creator A5035732342 @default.
• W4200364457 creator A5081912788 @default.
• W4200364457 creator A5083397333 @default.
• W4200364457 date "2022-04-01" @default.
• W4200364457 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W4200364457 title "Correspondence on “Ensuring best practice in genomics education and evaluation: Reporting item standards for education and its evaluation in genomics (RISE2 Genomics)” by Nisselle et al" @default.
• W4200364457 cites W2795659426 @default.
• W4200364457 cites W2823691356 @default.
• W4200364457 cites W2906821085 @default.
• W4200364457 cites W2958481062 @default.
• W4200364457 cites W3016278922 @default.
• W4200364457 cites W3036047053 @default.
• W4200364457 cites W3037066801 @default.
• W4200364457 cites W3143561573 @default.
• W4200364457 cites W3184898855 @default.
• W4200364457 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gim.2021.11.023" @default.
• W4200364457 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34930661" @default.
• W4200364457 hasPublicationYear "2022" @default.
• W4200364457 type Work @default.
• W4200364457 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W4200364457 countsByYear W42003644572022 @default.
• W4200364457 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4200364457 hasAuthorship W4200364457A5020472555 @default.
• W4200364457 hasAuthorship W4200364457A5033298715 @default.
• W4200364457 hasAuthorship W4200364457A5035732342 @default.
• W4200364457 hasAuthorship W4200364457A5081912788 @default.
• W4200364457 hasAuthorship W4200364457A5083397333 @default.
• W4200364457 hasBestOaLocation W42003644571 @default.
• W4200364457 hasConcept C104317684 @default.
• W4200364457 hasConcept C141231307 @default.
• W4200364457 hasConcept C189206191 @default.
• W4200364457 hasConcept C24103923 @default.
• W4200364457 hasConcept C509550671 @default.
• W4200364457 hasConcept C54355233 @default.
• W4200364457 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4200364457 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W4200364457 hasConceptScore W4200364457C104317684 @default.
• W4200364457 hasConceptScore W4200364457C141231307 @default.
• W4200364457 hasConceptScore W4200364457C189206191 @default.
• W4200364457 hasConceptScore W4200364457C24103923 @default.
• W4200364457 hasConceptScore W4200364457C509550671 @default.
• W4200364457 hasConceptScore W4200364457C54355233 @default.
• W4200364457 hasConceptScore W4200364457C71924100 @default.
• W4200364457 hasConceptScore W4200364457C86803240 @default.
• W4200364457 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W4200364457 hasLocation W42003644571 @default.
• W4200364457 hasLocation W42003644572 @default.
• W4200364457 hasLocation W42003644573 @default.
• W4200364457 hasOpenAccess W4200364457 @default.
• W4200364457 hasPrimaryLocation W42003644571 @default.
• W4200364457 hasRelatedWork W1972083208 @default.
• W4200364457 hasRelatedWork W2056892152 @default.
• W4200364457 hasRelatedWork W2090590178 @default.
• W4200364457 hasRelatedWork W2099543256 @default.
• W4200364457 hasRelatedWork W2102307643 @default.
• W4200364457 hasRelatedWork W2585888498 @default.
• W4200364457 hasRelatedWork W2805455200 @default.
• W4200364457 hasRelatedWork W2898193883 @default.
• W4200364457 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W4200364457 hasRelatedWork W2920969283 @default.
• W4200364457 hasVolume "24" @default.
• W4200364457 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4200364457 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4200364457 workType "article" @default.