METHODS: Dengue patients were recruited from a public health clinic in Malaysia and randomised to either use the DengueAid application plus standard care for dengue or receive only the standard care. The outcomes evaluated were the (1) feasibility of recruitment, data collection and follow-up procedures; (2) preliminary clinical outcome measures; and (3) acceptability of DengueAid. Qualitative interviews were conducted for participants in the intervention arm to assess the acceptability of DengueAid.
RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients were recruited with 97% (n = 36) retention rates. The recruitment rate was low (63% refusal rate, n = 62/99) with difficulty in data collection and follow-up due to the variable interval of care for dengue in an outpatient setting. DengueAid application was acceptable to the participants, but preliminary clinical outcomes and qualitative data suggested limited utility of the application. Unwell conditions of patients and limited access to healthcare are important factors impacting the application's utility.
CONCLUSION: The feasibility trial uncovered issues with recruitment, data collection and follow-up processes. Further research and modification to the application are needed to improve its utility and usability.
METHOD: A modified Delphi study was conducted among students and educators from University Malaya (UM), Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) and Taylor's University (TU) on three undergraduate programmes. In Round 1, participants were asked to select the topics from the respective syllabi to be developed into RLOs. Priority ranking was determined by using frequencies and proportions. The first quartile of the prioritised topics was included in Round 2 survey, which the participants were asked to rate the level of priority of each topic using a 5-point Likert scale. The mean score of the topics was compared between students and educators.
RESULT: A total of 43 educators and 377 students participated in this study. For UM and TU Pharmacy, there was a mismatch in the prioritised topics between the students and educators. For UPM, both the educators and students have prioritised the same topics in both rounds. To harmonise the prioritisation of topics between students and educators for UM and TU Pharmacy, the topics with a higher mean score by both the students and educators were prioritised.
CONCLUSION: The mismatch in prioritised topics between students and educators uncovered factors that might influence the prioritisation process. This study highlighted the importance of conducting needs assessment at the beginning of eLearning resources development.
METHODS: This is a qualitative study involving both the knowledge providers and receivers in focus group discussions (n = 25). Four focus group discussions were conducted in the early (n = 2) and mid-phase (n = 2) of the project by trained qualitative researchers using a topic guide designed to explore experiences and activities representing knowledge transfer in multi-institutional and multi-cultural settings. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and checked. The transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Five main themes emerged from this qualitative study: mismatched expectations between providers and receivers; acquiring new knowledge beyond the professional "comfort zone"; challenges in cascading newly acquired knowledge to colleagues and management; individual and organisational cultural differences; and disruption of knowledge transfer during the COVID-19 pandemic.
CONCLUSION: This study highlights the need to create a conducive platform to facilitate continuous, timely and bi-directional needs assessment and feedback; this should be done in the early phase of the knowledge transfer process. The challenges and strategies identified in this study could guide more effective knowledge transfer between organisations and countries.
METHODS: This study involved a modified electronic Delphi technique involving 27 specialists working in primary care recruited via convenient and snowball sampling. The Delphi survey was conducted online between August 2022 and April 2023, utilizing the Google Forms platform. Descriptive statistics were employed to analyse consensus across Delphi rounds.
RESULTS: Twenty-six international experts participated in the survey. The retention rate through the second and third Delphi rounds was 96.2% (n = 25). The broader consensus definition emphasizes person-centred care, collaborative patient-physician partnerships, and a holistic approach to health, including managing acute and chronic conditions through in-person or remote access based on patient preferences, medical needs, and local health system organization.
CONCLUSION: The study highlights the importance of continuity of care, prevention, and coordination with other healthcare professionals as core values of primary care. It also reflects the role of GP/FM in addressing new challenges post-pandemic, such as healthcare delivery beyond standard face-to-face care (e.g. remote consultations) and an increasingly important role in the prevention of infectious diseases. This underscores the need for ongoing research and patient involvement to continually refine and improve primary healthcare delivery in response to changing healthcare landscapes.