Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24903491›Full record

ArticleThe journal of primary prevention2014

Differences in observers' and teachers' fidelity assessments.

William B Hansen, Melinda M Pankratz, Dana C Bishop

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of primary prevention, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Quality Matters: Implementation Moderates Student Outcomes in the PATHS Curriculum.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2018
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Fidelity of D.A.R.E. Officers' Delivery of "keepin' it REAL" in Elementary & Middle School.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

William B HansenTanglewood Research, 420-A Gallimore Dairy Road, Greensboro, NC, 27409, USA, billhansen@tanglewood.net.
Melinda M Pankratz
Dana C Bishop

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As evidence-based programs become disseminated, understanding the degree to which they are implemented with fidelity is crucial. This study tested the validity of fidelity ratings made by observers versus those made by teachers. We hypothesized that teachers' reports about fidelity would have a positivity bias when compared to observers' reports. Further, we hypothesized that there would generally be low correspondence between teachers' and observers' ratings of fidelity. We examined teachers' and observers' ratings as they were related to mediating variables targeted for change by the intervention. Finally, we examined the role that years of teaching experience played in achieving fidelity. Eighteen teachers and four research assistants participated in this project as raters. Teachers made video recordings of their implementation of All Stars and completed fidelity assessment forms. Trained observers independently completed parallel forms for 215 sampled classroom sessions. Both teachers and observers rated adherence, quality of delivery, attendance, and participant engagement. Teachers made more positive fidelity ratings than did observers. With the exception of ratings for attendance, teachers and observers failed to agree on fidelity ratings. Observers' ratings were significantly related to students' pretest assessments of targeted program mediators. That observers' ratings were related to students' pretest scores, suggests it is easier to teach well when students are predisposed to program success. Teachers' ratings were infrequently related to mediators, but when they were, the relationship was counterintuitive. Experienced teachers taught with greater fidelity than novice teachers. While possibly inflated and inaccurate, gathering fidelity assessments from teachers may sensitize them to issues of fidelity as a result of requiring form completion. Assessing fidelity through observers' ratings of video recordings has significant merit. As a longterm investment in improving prevention outcomes, policy makers should consider requiring both teacher and observer fidelity assessments as essential components of evaluation.

Indexed as

CurriculumFacultySelf-AssessmentAdolescentAdultFemaleHealth EducationHumansMaleObserver VariationReproducibility of ResultsRisk-TakingSexual BehaviorSubstance-Related DisordersTeachingViolence

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.