Strategies for evaluation of an educational material in eye health
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.19995Keywords:
heath education, health promotion, eye health, in-service training, continuing education, evaluationAbstract
OBJECTIVE: to investigate the perception and views of health professionals and education on eye health manual for the development of actions of education and health promotion. METHOD: We chose to use focus group techniques of qualitative methodology. Data from four focus groups conducted were grouped into the following categories: the importance of the study, the presentation of material, the complexity of the subject, the motivation and the results were analyzed using content analysis of Bardin. RESULTS: professionals considered important to the subject matter and were motivated to use the material as teaching aids in their activities. Several suggestions were made, with emphasis on improvement in writing the chapter on structures of the eye, which showed very complex and difficult to understand. CONCLUSIONS: for the development of manuals intended for health education is extremely important that it be evaluated mainly by the public that the receptor material is intended to help achieve the objective. Using the technique of focus group for evaluating this manual proved to be a sensitive tool to detect the views and perceptions of professionals on educational materials developed, presenting greater opportunity to meet your goals.References
Buss PM. Uma introdução ao Conceito de Promoção da Saúde. In: Czeresnia D, Freitas CM. Promoção da Saúde – conceitos, reflexões, tendências. Rio de Janeiro: Fiocruz; 2003. p.15-37.
Pelicioni MCF, Pelicioni AF. Educação e promoção da saúde: uma retrospectiva histórica. Rev. O Mundo da Saúde. São Paulo, 2007; 31(3): 320-328.
Pelicioni MCF et al. A Educação e a Comunicação para a Promoção da Saúde. In: Rocha AA, Cesar CLG. Saúde Pública Bases Conceituais. São Paulo: Atheneu; 2008. p. 165-177.
Echer IC. Elaboração de manuais de orientação para o cuidado em saúde. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2005; 13(5):754-7.
Armond JE, Temporini ER, Alves MR. Promoção da saúde ocular na escola: percepções de professores sobre erros de refração. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2001; 64:395-400.
Temporini ER. Atendimento oftalmológico de escolares do sistema público de ensino no município de São Paulo – Aspectos médico-sociais. Arq Bras Oftalmol.2000; 63(5):359-63.
Iervolino AS, Pelicioni MCF. A utilização do grupo focal como metodologia qualitativa na promoção da saúde. Rev. Esc. Enferm. USP. 2001; 35(2): 115-21.
Martins MCFN, Bógus CM. Considerações sobre a metodologia qualitativa como recurso para o estudo das ações de humanização em saúde. Saúde e Sociedade. 2004, set/dez 13(3): 44-57.
Westphal MF, Bógus CM, Faria MM. Grupos focais: experiências precursoras em programas educativos em saúde no Brasil. Bol Oficina Sanit Panam. 1996;120(6):472-81.
Bardin L. Análise de conteúdo. Lisboa: Edições 70; 2008.
Fonseca LMM, Scochi CGS, Rocha SMMR, Leite AM. Cartilha educativa para orientação materna sobre os cuidados como bebê prematuro. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2004; 12(1):65-75.
Oliveira VLB, Landim FLP, Collares PM, Mesquita RB, Santos ZMSA. Modelo explicativo popular e profissional das mensagens de cartazes utilizados nas campanhas de saúde. Texto e Contexto Enferm. 2007, 16(2):287-93.
Sperandio AMG. Promoção da saúde ocular e prevenção precoce de problemas visuais nos serviços de saúde pública. Rev Saúde Pública. 1999; 33(5): 513-20.
Penteado RZ, Seabra MN, Bicudo-Pereira IMT. Ações educativas em saúde da criança: o brincar enquanto recurso para participação da família. Rev. Bras. Cresc. Desenv. Hum. 1996, 6(1/2): 49-56.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JOURNAL PUBLISHERS
Publishers who are Committee on Publication Ethics members and who support COPE membership for journal editors should:
- Follow this code, and encourage the editors they work with to follow the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Edi- tors (http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/New_Code.pdf)
- Ensure the editors and journals they work with are aware of what their membership of COPE provides and en- tails
- Provide reasonable practical support to editors so that they can follow the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors (http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/New_Code.pdf_)
Publishers should:
- Define the relationship between publisher, editor and other parties in a contract
- Respect privacy (for example, for research participants, for authors, for peer reviewers)
- Protect intellectual property and copyright
- Foster editorial independence
Publishers should work with journal editors to:
- Set journal policies appropriately and aim to meet those policies, particularly with respect to:
– Editorial independence
– Research ethics, including confidentiality, consent, and the special requirements for human and animal research
– Authorship
– Transparency and integrity (for example, conflicts of interest, research funding, reporting standards
– Peer review and the role of the editorial team beyond that of the journal editor
– Appeals and complaints
- Communicate journal policies (for example, to authors, readers, peer reviewers)
- Review journal policies periodically, particularly with respect to new recommendations from the COPE
- Code of Conduct for Editors and the COPE Best Practice Guidelines
- Maintain the integrity of the academic record
- Assist the parties (for example, institutions, grant funders, governing bodies) responsible for the investigation of suspected research and publication misconduct and, where possible, facilitate in the resolution of these cases
- Publish corrections, clarifications, and retractions
- Publish content on a timely basis