↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating an online training module on protecting children from secondhand smoke exposure: impact on knowledge, confidence and self-reported practice of health and social care professionals

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluating an online training module on protecting children from secondhand smoke exposure: impact on knowledge, confidence and self-reported practice of health and social care professionals
Published in
BMC Public Health, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2488-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura L. Jones, Andy McEwen

Abstract

Healthcare professionals report that a lack of training is the primary barrier to raising the issue of secondhand smoke (SHS). An open access online training module was therefore developed for those working with smoking families to deliver effective very brief advice on SHS. The current study aimed to evaluate the following: (1) does knowledge increase as a result of participating in the online training module, and (2) does the module impact on participant confidence and self-reported practice relating to SHS. Those accessing the module were invited to participate in an evaluation to assess participants' knowledge about, and confidence in, delivering very brief advice on SHS. Change in knowledge was assessed via ten multiple choice questions and confidence was assessed by Likert scale responses to three statements. Data were collected across three time points: pre-training, post-training and after 3 months. Data were also collected at 3 months post module completion on self-reported changes in practice and key learning points. Data at all three time points were available for 178 participants (~1 % of those who visited the module homepage over a 2 year period). Knowledge and confidence to deliver effective very brief advice for SHS significantly increased between the pre- and post-training assessments and was maintained at 3 months. Eighty-four percent self-reported that they perceived taking part in the training had led to positive changes in their clinical practice. There is potential for this module to be embedded within training programmes across health and social care professions, which may help to increase the knowledge and confidence of health and social care professionals to deliver very brief advice for SHS to smoking families. Future research needs to explore whether the smoking families who receive very brief advice for SHS are motivated to make changes to their home smoking behaviours and whether roll-out of this intervention would be cost-effective.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 75 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 13%
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 26 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 19%
Social Sciences 8 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 9%
Psychology 7 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 29 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 December 2015.
All research outputs
#12,744,347
of 22,833,393 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#8,719
of 14,873 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,633
of 252,470 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#131
of 236 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,833,393 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,873 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 252,470 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 236 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.