OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the utility and usability of ScreenMen.
METHODS: This study used both qualitative and quantitative methods. Healthy men working in a banking institution were recruited to participate in this study. They were purposively sampled according to job position, age, education level, and screening status. Men were asked to use ScreenMen independently while the screen activities were being recorded. Once completed, retrospective think aloud with playback was conducted with men to obtain their feedback. They were asked to answer the System Usability Scale (SUS). Intention to undergo screening pre- and postintervention was also measured. Qualitative data were analyzed using a framework approach followed by thematic analysis. For quantitative data, the mean SUS score was calculated and change in intention to screening was analyzed using McNemar test.
RESULTS: In total, 24 men participated in this study. On the basis of the qualitative data, men found ScreenMen useful as they could learn more about their health risks and screening. They found ScreenMen convenient to use, which might trigger men to undergo screening. In terms of usability, men thought that ScreenMen was user-friendly and easy to understand. The key revision done on utility was the addition of a reminder function, whereas for usability, the revisions done were in terms of attracting and gaining users' trust, improving learnability, and making ScreenMen usable to all types of users. To attract men to use it, ScreenMen was introduced to users in terms of improving health instead of going for screening. Another important revision made was emphasizing the screening tests the users do not need, instead of just informing them about the screening tests they need. A Quick Assessment Mode was also added for users with limited attention span. The quantitative data showed that 8 out of 23 men (35%) planned to attend screening earlier than intended after using the ScreenMen. Furthermore, 4 out of 12 (33%) men who were in the precontemplation stage changed to either contemplation or preparation stage after using ScreenMen with P=.13. In terms of usability, the mean SUS score of 76.4 (SD 7.72) indicated that ScreenMen had good usability.
CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that ScreenMen was acceptable to men in terms of its utility and usability. The preliminary data suggested that ScreenMen might increase men's intention to undergo screening. This paper also presented key lessons learned from the beta testing, which is useful for public health experts and researchers when developing a user-centered mobile Web app.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of social media as an educational medium to effectively translate emerging research evidence into clinical practice.
METHODS: The study used a mixed-methods approach. Evidence-based practice points were delivered via social media platforms. The primary outcomes of attitude, knowledge, and behavior change were assessed using a preintervention/postintervention evaluation, with qualitative data gathered to contextualize the findings.
RESULTS: Data were obtained from 317 clinicians from multiple health disciplines, predominantly from the United Kingdom, Australia, the United States, India, and Malaysia. The participants reported an overall improvement in attitudes toward social media for professional development (Psocial media had changed the way they practice, or intended to practice. Similarly, a large proportion of respondents (135/193, 69.9%) indicated that the education they had received via social media had increased their use of research evidence within their clinical practice.
CONCLUSIONS: Social media may be an effective educational medium for improving knowledge of health professionals, fostering their use of research evidence, and changing their clinical behaviors by translating new research evidence into clinical practice.
Results: The mean age of patients in group 1 was 6.8 ± 2.1 years, group 2: 8.15 ± 2.27 years, group 3: 7.5 ± 2.3 years, and group 4: 7.27 ± 1.68 years. The intragroup comparisons of heart rate and facial image scores have shown a significant difference in before and after dental treatment procedures. Marked reduction in heart rate and facial image scale scores were found in patients belonging to group 1 (mobile applications) and group 2 (dental video songs). An increase in heart rate and facial image scale scores was seen in group 3 (tell-show-do) and the control group.
Conclusion: The paediatric dental anxiety is a common finding in dental clinics. Behavior modification techniques like smartphone applications, "little lovely dentist," and "dental songs" can alleviate dental anxiety experienced by paediatric patients. The "tell-show-do" technique although most commonly used did not prove to be beneficial in the reduction of the anxiety levels.
METHODS: Multistage sampling method was used to collect data (n = 210) from three unions of Satkhira District, Bangladesh. The dependent variable was the presence of COVID-19 related misconception (Yes, No) which was generated based on respondents' responses to a set of six questions on various types of misconception. Exposure variables were respondents' socio-demographic characteristics, mass media and social media exposure. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the characteristics of the respondents. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to determine the factors associated with COVID-19 misconception.
RESULTS: More than half of the study respondents had one or more COVID-19 related misconception. Over 50% of the total respondents considered this disease as a punishment from God. Besides, many of the respondents reported that they do not think the virus causing COVID-19 is dangerous (59%) and it is a disease (19%). Around 7% reported they believe the virus is the part of a virus war (7.2%). The bivariate analysis found the presence of socio-demographic factors of the respondents, as well as the factors related to social and mass media, were significantly associated with the COVID-19's misconception. However, once all factors considered together in the multivariate model, misconception were found to be lower among secondary (AOR, 0.33, 95% CI: 0.13-0.84) and tertiary (AOR, 0.29, 95% CI: 0.09-0.92) educated respondents compared to the respondents with primary education.
CONCLUSION: This study obtained a very higher percentage of misconception about the COVID-19 among the respondents of Satkhira district in Bangladesh. This could be a potential challenge to fight against this pandemic which is now ongoing. Prioritizing mass and social media to disseminate evidence-based information as well as educate people about this disease are necessary.