Values and tensions of a health education program based on evidence-based medicine: a qualitative study

Author:

Vergel JohnORCID,Casallas-Murillo Ana-LucíaORCID,Laverde-Robayo Diana-MarcelaORCID,Cristancho-Casallas PabloORCID

Abstract

AbstractAimThis study explored how patients, caregivers, clinicians, designers, and funders who worked collaboratively on a health education program experienced its design. The program was based on evidence-based medicine and knowledge transmission.Subject and methodsThrough exploratory qualitative research, the authors conducted 21 semistructured interviews, collected six nonparticipatory observations, and conducted a documentary analysis. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis, producing rich descriptions about the participants’ experiences. The researchers’ interpretations were validated through peer review.ResultsThree themes were revealed by the findings: background, values, and tensions. All participants had a range of assumptions about this experience regarding which evidence-based recommendations should be prioritized and disseminated to patients/caregivers in program implementation. These assumptions were based on participants’ beliefs about how people make evidence-informed decisions, allowing them to take charge of their health. The authors found a gap between these assumptions and the purposes of the educational program.ConclusionAlthough health education programs aim to foster patients’ informed decision making and health empowerment, in our case we found some assumptions that were not in line with the objectives of the educational program. We hypothesize that some gaps in the program design, derived from different assumptions, such as (a) conflicts of particular interests, (b) knowledge gaps about health-disease processes, and (c) power asymmetries between doctors and patients/caregivers, could hinder the goals of health education (e.g., engagement) in the practice of evidence-based medicine.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3