Trial reportAcademic pediatrics
Comparing Two Training Approaches to Scaling Up the Safe Environment for Every Kid (SEEK) Approach.
Trial report in Academic pediatrics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the impact of 2 common continuing medical education training modalities-independent online (IND) and a Maintenance of Certification-4 activity (MOC)-and primary care practice characteristics on scaling up (ie, the adoption, implementation, and sustainment) of the Safe Environment for Every Kid (SEEK) approach.
methodsThis longitudinal, multisite study involved 44 practices across the United States, 25 of whom were randomized to one of 2 training modalities. We ascertained the extent to which primary care professionals (PCPs) in each practice completed the assigned training (ie, "dose"). Practice personnel were surveyed up to 4 times over a 2-year period regarding their views on changing their practice, evidence-based practices, and their leadership. Predictors included training modality and dose and practice characteristics. Outcomes were startup, fidelity, and sustainment regarding SEEK.
resultsOnly 31% of MOC and 25% of IND practices had most (≥75%) PCPs complete their training; 15% and 17% had an intermediate status with 50%-74%. Approximately half the practices achieved startup and most implemented SEEK with fidelity and sustained this for 2 years. There were few differences between the IND versus MOC practices; more training was associated with greater fidelity, especially in the IND practices. Practices that had greater baseline commitment and sense of efficacy were more likely to start implementing SEEK and do so with fidelity.
conclusionsThe findings support the simpler IND training approach and the value of sound preparation to foster commitment and a sense of efficacy. Improved strategies for encouraging PCPs to complete such training are needed. The study offers a valuable example of evaluating widely used training modalities as well as the scaling up of an evidence-based practice such as SEEK.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.