ArticleTranslational behavioral medicine2020
Evaluating the implementation fidelity of a community-based intervention to promote hearing conservation among farm and rural youth.
Article in Translational behavioral medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Community-based program to increase use of hearing conservation practices among farm and rural youth: a cluster randomized trial of effectiveness.BMC public health · 2020Trial
- Interventions to prevent noise-induced hearing loss in farmworkers: a scoping review.International journal of audiology · 2025Article
- Assessing the implementation fidelity, feasibility, and sustainability of community-based house improvement for malaria control in southern Malawi: a mixed-methods study.BMC public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Noise-induced hearing loss is common among farm and rural youth. There is a lack of programs preparing this high-risk population to use hearing conservation strategies. Safety Days are 1-day workshops that teach 100,000 rural children safe farm practices in 400 sites across the USA annually. As part of a larger study for fourth graders, a hearing conservation lesson was delivered at 25 sites nationwide. However, the fidelity to the study-designed curriculum and quality of instruction was unknown. We examined whether community volunteers are capable of delivering, with adequate fidelity and quality, a planned intervention designed to increase use of hearing conservation strategies among farm and rural youth. We invited instructors (n = 22) to deliver a health lesson to fourth graders and provide lesson recordings. We developed instruments rating (i) fidelity of the teaching to the curriculum and (ii) quality of instruction. Initial instruments were modified based on the review for clarity, relevance, and conceptual fit; inter-rater reliabilities were .90 (content fidelity) and 1.00 (quality of instruction). Of seven recordings reviewed, mean fidelity to the planned curriculum was 1.51 (max score = 2), with nearly four fifths of lesson items fully addressed. Overall mean of rating of quality of instruction was 1.97 (out of 2). Fidelity to both content and quality of instruction was high. Results provide a model and support for use of community volunteers (with no special educational or experiential background) and fidelity testing as cost-effective strategies to provide sustainable programming for hearing conservation among farm and rural youth.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.