Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorDahlgren, Astrid
dc.contributor.authorSemakula, Daniel
dc.contributor.authorChesire, Faith
dc.contributor.authorMugisha, Michael
dc.contributor.authorNakyejwe, Esther
dc.contributor.authorNsangi, Allen
dc.contributor.authorNyirazinyoye, Laetitia
dc.contributor.authorOchieng, Marlyn A.
dc.contributor.authorOxman, Andrew David
dc.contributor.authorSsenyonga, Ronald
dc.contributor.authorSimbi, Clarisse Marie Claudine
dc.date.accessioned2024-03-07T06:55:50Z
dc.date.available2024-03-07T06:55:50Z
dc.date.created2024-03-06T10:47:08Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.identifier.citationF1000 Research. 2023, 12 1-14.en_US
dc.identifier.issn2046-1402
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3121351
dc.description.abstractBackground: Every day we are faced with different treatment claims, in the news, in social media, and by our family and friends. Some of these claims are true, but many are unsubstantiated. Without being supported by reliable evidence such guidance can lead to waste and harmful health choices. The Informed Health Choices (IHC) Network facilitates development of interventions for teaching children and adults the ability to assess treatment claims (informedhealthchoices.org). Our objective was to develop and evaluate a new assessment tool developed from the item bank for use in an upcoming trial of lower secondary school resources in Uganda, Kenya, and Rwanda. Methods: A cross-sectional study evaluating a questionnaire including two item-sets was used. The first evaluated ability using multiple- choice questions (scored dichotomously) and the other evaluated intended behaviour and self-efficacy (measured using Likert scales). This study was conducted in Uganda, Kenya, and Rwanda in 2021. We recruited children (over 12 years old) and adults through schools and our networks. We entered 1,671 responses into our analysis. Summary and individual fit to the Rasch model (including Cronbach’s Alpha) were assessed using the RUMM2030 software. Results: Both item-sets were found to have good fit to the Rasch model and were acceptable to our target audience. The reliability was good (Cronbach’s alpha >0.7). Observations of the individual item and person fit provided us with guidance on how we could improve the design, scoring, and administration of the two item-sets. There was no local dependency in either of the item-sets, and both item-sets were found to have acceptable unidimensionality. Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first instrument validated for measuring ability to assess treatment claims in Uganda, Kenya and Rwanda. Overall, the two item-sets were found to have satisfactory measurement properties.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleCritical thinking about treatment effects in Eastern Africa: development and Rasch analysis of an assessment toolen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1
dc.identifier.doi10.12688/f1000research.132052.1
dc.identifier.cristin2252319
dc.source.journalF1000 Researchen_US
dc.source.volume12en_US
dc.source.pagenumber1-14en_US
dc.relation.projectNorges forskningsråd: 284683en_US


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal