ABSTRACT
Introduction COVID-19 underscored the importance of field epidemiology training programs (FETP) as countries struggled with overwhelming demands. Experts are calling for more field epidemiologists with better training. Since 1951 FETP have been building public health capacities across the globe, yet explorations of learning in these programs are lacking. This qualitative study will 1) describe approaches to training field epidemiologists in FETP; 2) describe strategies for learning field epidemiology among FETP trainees; and 3) explain the principles and practices aligning training approaches with learning strategies in FETP.
Methods and analysis The research design, implementation, and interpretation are collaborative efforts with FETP trainers. Data collection will include interviews with FETP trainers and trainees and participant observations of FETP training and learning events in four FETP in the Western Pacific Region. Data analysis will occur in three phases: I) we will use the constant comparison method of Charmaz’s grounded theory during open coding to identify and prioritise categories and properties in the data; II) during focused coding, we will use constant comparison and Polkinghorne’s analysis of narratives, comparing stories of prioritized categories, to fill out properties of those categories; III) we will use Polkinghorne’s narrative analysis to construct narratives that reflect domains of interest, identifying correspondence among Carr and Kemmis’s practices, understandings, and situations to explain principles and processes of learning in FETP.
Ethics and dissemination We have obtained the required ethics approvals to conduct this research at The Australian National University (2021/771) and Taiwan’s Ministry of Health and Welfare (112206). Data will not be available publicly, but anonymised findings will be shared with FETP for collaborative interpretation. Ultimately, findings and interpretations will appear in peer reviewed journals and conferences.
STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDY
This study will be co-designed, co-developed, and co-interpreted with practitioners to generate relevant, useful, and informative findings for field epidemiology training programs, practitioners, and learners.
Use of multiple data collection methods and theoretical frameworks will improve the credibility of the findings.
Engagement of participants and programs throughout the process to check interpretations and facilitate dialogue on findings will strengthen the trustworthiness of the findings.
The methodology aims to explore experiences in depth, and resources restrict the number of programs and participants that may enrol. So, there will be limits to the generalizability of the findings beyond the included programs.
As grounded theory aims for hypothesis generation not hypothesis testing, the findings will be limited to explanations of training and learning and thus not interpretable as statements of the effectiveness of training approaches or programs.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
We have obtained approval from The Australian National University Human Research Ethics Committee to conduct this research (2021/771), unconditional approval from ANU Institutional Research, which oversees research on ANU students, and approval from the Institutional Review Board of Centers for Disease Control, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Taiwan (112206). No additional approvals are required.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data will not be publicly available because of privacy concerns.
