The National Health Educator Job Analysis 2010 was conducted to update the competencies model for entry- and advanced-level health educators. Qualitative and quantitative methods were used. Structured interviews, focus groups, and a modified Delphi technique were implemented to engage 59 health educators from diverse work settings and experience levels in a seven-step instrument development process. An online survey was then completed by 1,022 practicing health educators. Survey participants used 4-point ordinal scales to rank subcompetencies by frequency of use and importance and related knowledge items by cognitive levels based on the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy. Composite scores were calculated and subgroup comparisons conducted to validate 223 subcompetencies at entry (162), advanced-1 (42), and advanced-2 (19) levels of practice, along with 113 knowledge items. Advanced-level versus entry-level competencies and a comparison with the Competency Update Project model of 2006 are discussed. Implications and recommendations for the profession are provided.
The Health Education Specialist Practice Analysis 2015 (HESPA 2015) was conducted to update and validate the Areas of Responsibilities, Competencies, and Sub-competencies for Entry- and Advanced-Level Health Education Specialists. Two data collection instruments were developed—one was focused on Sub-competencies and the other on knowledge items related to the practice of health education. Instruments were administered to health education specialists (N = 3,152) using online survey methods. A total of 2,508 survey participants used 4-point ordinal scales to rank Sub-competencies by frequency of use and importance. The other 644 participants used the same 4-point frequency scale to rank related knowledge items. Composite scores for Sub-competencies were calculated and subgroup comparisons were conducted that resulted in the validation of 7 Areas of Responsibilities, 36 Competencies, and 258 Sub-competencies. Of the Sub-competencies, 141 were identified as Entry-level, 76 Advanced 1–level, and 41 Advanced 2–level. In addition, 131 knowledge items were verified. The HESPA 2015 findings are compared with the results of the Health Education Job Analysis 2010 and will be useful to those involved in professional preparation, continuing education, and employment of health education specialists.
Objective To develop a comprehensive and current description of what health informatics (HI) professionals do and what they need to know. Materials and Methods Six independent subject-matter expert panels drawn from and representative of HI professionals contributed to the development of a draft HI delineation of practice (DoP). An online survey was distributed to HI professionals to validate the draft DoP. A total of 1011 HI practitioners completed the survey. Survey respondents provided domain, task, knowledge and skill (KS) ratings, qualitative feedback on the completeness of the DoP, and detailed professional background and demographic information. Results This practice analysis resulted in a validated, comprehensive, and contemporary DoP comprising 5 domains, 74 tasks, and 144 KS statements. Discussion The HI practice analysis defined “health informatics professionals” to include practitioners with clinical (eg, dentistry, nursing, pharmacy), public health, and HI or computer science training. The affirmation of the DoP by reviewers and survey respondents reflects the emergence of a core set of tasks performed and KSs used by informaticians representing a broad spectrum of those currently practicing in the field. Conclusion The HI practice analysis represents the first time that HI professionals have been surveyed to validate a description of their practice. The resulting HI DoP is an important milestone in the maturation of HI as a profession and will inform HI certification, accreditation, and education activities.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.