Ensuring best practice in genomics education and evaluation: reporting item standards for education and its evaluation in genomics (RISE2 Genomics).
Journal
Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics
ISSN: 1530-0366
Titre abrégé: Genet Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9815831
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2021
07 2021
Historique:
received:
20
10
2020
accepted:
26
02
2021
revised:
25
02
2021
pubmed:
8
4
2021
medline:
13
8
2021
entrez:
7
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Widespread, quality genomics education for health professionals is required to create a competent genomic workforce. A lack of standards for reporting genomics education and evaluation limits the evidence base for replication and comparison. We therefore undertook a consensus process to develop a recommended minimum set of information to support consistent reporting of design, development, delivery, and evaluation of genomics education interventions. Draft standards were derived from literature (25 items from 21 publications). Thirty-six international experts were purposively recruited for three rounds of a modified Delphi process to reach consensus on relevance, clarity, comprehensiveness, utility, and design. The final standards include 18 items relating to development and delivery of genomics education interventions, 12 relating to evaluation, and 1 on stakeholder engagement. These Reporting Item Standards for Education and its Evaluation in Genomics (RISE2 Genomics) are intended to be widely applicable across settings and health professions. Their use by those involved in reporting genomics education interventions and evaluation, as well as adoption by journals and policy makers as the expected standard, will support greater transparency, consistency, and comprehensiveness of reporting. Consequently, the genomics education evidence base will be more robust, enabling high-quality education and evaluation across diverse settings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33824503
doi: 10.1038/s41436-021-01140-x
pii: S1098-3600(21)05043-7
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1356-1365Investigateurs
Jane Maguire
(J)
Erin Rooney Riggs
(ER)
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Références
Slade, I. & Burton, H. Preparing clinicians for genomic medicine. Postgrad. Med. J. 92, 369 (2016).
doi: 10.1136/postgradmedj-2016-133962
Owusu Obeng, A. et al. Physician-reported benefits and barriers to clinical implementation of genomic medicine: a multi-site IGNITE-network survey. J. Pers. Med. 8, 24 (2018).
doi: 10.3390/jpm8030024
White, S., Jacobs, C. & Phillips, J. Mainstreaming genetics and genomics: a systematic review of the barriers and facilitators for nurses and physicians in secondary and tertiary care. Genet. Med. 22, 1149–1155 (2020).
doi: 10.1038/s41436-020-0785-6
Amara, N., Blouin-Bougie, J., Bouthillier, D. & Simard, J. On the readiness of physicians for pharmacogenomics testing: an empirical assessment. Pharmacogenomics J. 18, 308–318 (2018).
doi: 10.1038/tpj.2017.22
Al Bakir, I., Sebepos-Rogers, G. M., Burton, H. & Monahan, K. J. Mainstreaming of genomic medicine in gastroenterology, present and future: a nationwide survey of UK gastroenterology trainees. BMJ Open. 9, e030505 (2019).
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030505
Nisselle, A. et al. Ensuring best practice in genomic education and evaluation: a program logic approach. Front. Genet. 10, 1057 (2019).
doi: 10.3389/fgene.2019.01057
Talwar, D., Tseng, T. S., Foster, M., Xu, L. & Chen, L. S. Genetics/genomics education for nongenetic health professionals: a systematic literature review. Genet. Med. 19, 725–732 (2017).
doi: 10.1038/gim.2016.156
Paneque, M., Turchetti, D., Jackson, L., Lunt, P., Houwink, E. & Skirton, H. A systematic review of interventions to provide genetics education for primary care. BMC Fam. Pract. 17, 89 (2016).
doi: 10.1186/s12875-016-0483-2
Yarbrough, D. B., Shulha, L. M., Hopson, R. K. & Caruthers F. A. The Program Evaluation Standards: A Guide for Evaluators and Evaluation Users. (SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, 2010).
Bossuyt, P. M. et al. STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies. Clin. Chem. 61, 1446–1452 (2015).
doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2015.246280
Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G. & Moher, D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J. Pharmacol. Pharmacother. 1, 100–107 (2010).
doi: 10.4103/0976-500X.72352
Ev, Elm, Altman, D. G., Egger, M., Pocock, S. J., Gøtzsche, P. C. & Vandenbroucke, J. P. Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Int. J. Surg. 12, 1495–1499 (2007).
Tong, A., Sainsbury, P. & Craig, J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int. J. Qual. Health Care. 19, 349–357 (2007).
doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J. & Altman, D. G. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 6, e1000097 (2009).
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Richards, S. et al. Standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants: a joint consensus recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology. Genet. Med. 17, 405–424 (2015).
doi: 10.1038/gim.2015.30
Popejoy, A. B. et al. Clinical genetics lacks standard definitions and protocols for the collection and use of diversity measures. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 107, 72–82 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2020.05.005
Hooker, G. W., Babu, D., Myers, M. F., Zierhut, H. & McAllister, M. Standards for the reporting of Genetic Counseling interventions in Research and Other Studies (GCIRS): an NSGC Task Force report. J. Genet. Couns. 26, 355–360 (2017).
doi: 10.1007/s10897-017-0076-9
McKenna, H. P. The Delphi technique: a worthwhile research approach for nursing? J. Adv. Nurs. 19, 1221–1225 (1994).
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.1994.tb01207.x
Phillips, A. C. et al. Development and validation of the guideline for reporting evidence-based practice educational interventions and teaching (GREET). BMC Med. Educ. 16, 237 (2016).
doi: 10.1186/s12909-016-0759-1
Yarbrough, D. B. Developing the program evaluation utility standards: scholarly foundations and collaborative processes. Can. J. Program Eval. 31, 284–304 (2017).
Arksey, H. & O’Malley, L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 8, 19–32 (2005).
doi: 10.1080/1364557032000119616
Crellin, E., McClaren, B., Nisselle, A., Best, S., Gaff, C. & Metcalfe, S. Preparing medical specialists to practice genomic medicine: education an essential part of a broader strategy. Front. Genet. 10, 789 (2019).
doi: 10.3389/fgene.2019.00789
Reed, E. K. et al. What works in genomics education: outcomes of an evidenced-based instructional model for community-based physicians. Genet. Med. 18, 737–745 (2016).
doi: 10.1038/gim.2015.144
Paneque, M. et al. Implementing genetic education in primary care: the Gen-Equip programme. J. Community Genet. 8, 147–150 (2017).
doi: 10.1007/s12687-017-0296-6
Carroll, J. C. et al. GenetiKit: a randomized controlled trial to enhance delivery of genetics services by family physicians. Fam. Pract. 28, 615–623 (2011).
doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmr040
Houwink, E. J. et al. Sustained effects of online genetics education: a randomized controlled trial on oncogenetics. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 22, 310–316 (2014).
doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2013.163
Houwink, E. J. et al. Effectiveness of oncogenetics training on general practitioners’ consultation skills: a randomized controlled trial. Genet. Med. 16, 45–52 (2014).
doi: 10.1038/gim.2013.69
Formea, C. M. et al. Development and evaluation of a pharmacogenomics educational program for pharmacists. Am. J. Pharm. Educ. 77, 10 (2013).
doi: 10.5688/ajpe77110
Ha, V. T. D., Frizzo-Barker, J. & Chow-White, P. Adopting clinical genomics: a systematic review of genomic literacy among physicians in cancer care. BMC Med. Genomics. 11, 18 (2018).
doi: 10.1186/s12920-018-0337-y
Jackson, L. et al. The Gen-Equip Project: evaluation and impact of genetics e-learning resources for primary care in six European languages. Genet. Med. 21, 718–726 (2019).
doi: 10.1038/s41436-018-0132-3
MacDonald, G. Framework for Program Evaluation in Public Health: A Checklist of Steps and Standards. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, 2014).
Australasian Evaluation Society. Guidelines for the Ethical Conduct of Evaluations. (Australian Evaluation Society, Melbourne, 2013).
Brookes, S. T. et al. Three nested randomized controlled trials of peer-only or multiple stakeholder group feedback within Delphi surveys during core outcome and information set development. Trials. 17, 409 (2016).
doi: 10.1186/s13063-016-1479-x
McClaren, B. J. Cystic Fibrosis Cascade Carrier Testing in Victoria, Australia. (The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, 2010).
Paquette-Warren, J., Tyler, M., Fournie, M. & Harris, S. B. The Diabetes Evaluation Framework for Innovative National Evaluations (DEFINE): construct and content validation using a modified Delphi method. Can. J. Diabetes. 41, 281–296 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcjd.2016.10.011
Patton, M. Q. Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice. (SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, 2014).
Van Hecke, A., Duprez, V., Pype, P., Beeckman, D. & Verhaeghe, S. Criteria for describing and evaluating training interventions in healthcare professions—CRe-DEPTH. Nurse Educ. Today. 84, 104254 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2019.104254
McClaren, B. J., King, E. A., Crellin, E., Gaff, C., Metcalfe, S. A. & Nisselle, A. Development of an evidence-based, theory-informed national survey of physician preparedness for genomic medicine and preferences for genomics continuing education. Front. Genet. 11, 59 (2020).
doi: 10.3389/fgene.2020.00059
Bloom, B. S., Krathwohl, D. R. & Masia, B. B. Bloom Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. (Pearson Education, Boston, 1984).
Funnell, S. & Rogers, P. Purposeful Program Theory: Effective Use of Theories of Change and Logic Models. (John Wiley & Sons, San Francisco, 2011).