ArticleHealth education research2023
Mixed method evaluation of a clinic waiting room-based health education program in the Dominican Republic.
Article in Health education research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Pilot Study on the Feasibility and Usability of a Midwife-Led Visual Educational Tool for Sex Education.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Waiting rooms provide an ideal location to disseminate health information. In this mixed-methods study, we evaluated waiting room-based health education talks at two clinics in the Dominican Republic and explored recommendations for implementing this intervention in similar settings. The talks addressed noncommunicable diseases, sexually transmitted infections, family planning and gender-based violence. We conducted pre- and posttests to assess attendees' change in knowledge and conducted semi-structured interviews with a subset of them. We conducted a semi-structured focus group with educators. Analyses included Wilcox Signed Rank Tests and McNemar tests for pre- and posttests, conventional content analysis for individual interviews and transcript coding for the focus group. Patient participants were 69.3% female aged 39.6 years (SD = 13.5) on average at one clinic (n = 127) and 100% female aged 17.4 (SD = 1.3) on average at the second clinic (n = 24). Focus group participants (n = 5) had 4.8 years (SD = 3.3) of health educator experience on average. Pre- and posttests showed significant improvement (P < 0.05) across all talks. Qualitative interviews emphasized engaging, clear and brief content delivery with visual aids. The focus group highlighted the importance of patient-centered design with culturally concordant delivery and identified implementation challenges. Findings demonstrate that waiting room-based education talks improve knowledge and provide suggestions for similar interventions.
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.