ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Process Evaluation of the Child and Youth Healthcare Intervention 'Medical Advice for Sick-Reported Students in Primary School' (MASS-PS).
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Developing a tool to evaluate the impact of a student-led community-engaging health promotion project on knowledge translation skills in medical students.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- How to deal with sickness absence among primary school pupils? Adaptation of the "Medical Advice for Sick-reported Students" intervention.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- The Preventive Child and Youth Healthcare Service in the Netherlands: The State of the Art and Challenges Ahead.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
School attendance is crucial for the development of a child. Sickness absence is the most common type of absenteeism and can be a red flag for underlying problems. To address sickness absence, the intervention Medical Advice for Sick-reported Students for Primary School (MASS-PS) was recently developed. It targets children at risk and is a school-based child and youth health care intervention. The present study is a process evaluation of the intervention. MASS-PS was implemented and evaluated in 29 schools in the West-Brabant region of the Netherlands, during three school years (2017-2020). Attendance coordinators (ACs) from the different schools were interviewed in six focus group interviews as well as in over 200 individual conversations, of which logbooks were kept. Content analysis was used based on a framework of implementation elements. During the first year of the study, the uptake was low. Changes were made by the project group to improve the uptake. The ACs generally considered the MASS-PS as compatible and relevant, but suggested improvements by adding a medical consultation function with a child and youth healthcare physician and increasing the threshold for selecting children at risk. They saw several personal benefits, although time was necessary to learn to use the intervention. An organisational barrier was the lack of teaching staff. A strength in the organisational structure was the appointment of ACs. A major event in the sociological structure was the COVID-19 pandemic. ACs felt that the intervention helped them keep track of sickness absence during the pandemic. The Medical Advice for Sick-reported Students for Primary School intervention was implemented successfully, and the process evaluation gave insight into possible improvements.
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.