Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38820530›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2024

Mechanisms of school-based peer education interventions to improve young people's health literacy or health behaviours: A realist-informed systematic review.

Emily Widnall, Steven Dodd, Abigail Emma Russell, Esther Curtin, Ruth Simmonds, Mark Limmer, Judi Kidger

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. 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

7 authors.

Emily WidnallCentre for Public Health, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7107-562X
Steven DoddFaculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom.
Abigail Emma RussellCollege of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Esther CurtinCentre for Public Health, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6799-1118
Ruth SimmondsMental Health Foundation, London, United Kingdom.
Mark LimmerFaculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom.
Judi KidgerCentre for Public Health, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPeer education interventions are widely used in secondary schools with an aim to improve students' health literacy and/or health behaviours. Although peer education is a popular intervention technique with some evidence of effectiveness, we know relatively little about the key components that lead to health improvements among young people, or components that may be less helpful. This review aims to identify the main mechanisms involved in school-based peer education health interventions for 11-18-year-olds.

methodsFive electronic databases were searched for eligible studies during October 2020, an updated search was then conducted in January 2023 to incorporate any new studies published between November 2020 and January 2023. To be included in the review, studies must have evaluated a school-based peer education intervention designed to address aspects of the health of students aged 11-18 years old and contain data relevant to mechanisms of effect of these interventions. No restrictions were placed on publication date, or country but only manuscripts available in English language were included.

resultsForty papers were identified for inclusion with a total of 116 references to intervention mechanisms which were subsequently grouped thematically into 10 key mechanisms. The four most common mechanisms discussed were: 1) Peerness; similar, relatable and credible 2) A balance between autonomy and support, 3) School values and broader change in school culture; and 4) Informal, innovative and personalised delivery methods. Mechanisms were identified in quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods intervention evaluations. DISCUSSION: This study highlights a number of key mechanisms that can be used to inform development of future school-based peer education health interventions to maximise effectiveness. Future studies should aim to create theories of change or logic models, and then test the key mechanisms, rather than relying on untested theoretical assumptions. Future work should also examine whether particular mechanisms may lead to harm, and also whether certain mechanisms are more or less important to address different health issues, or whether a set of generic mechanisms always need to be activated for success.

Indexed as

Health BehaviorHealth LiteracyPeer GroupAdolescentChildHealth EducationHumansSchool Health ServicesSchoolsStudents

Identifiers

PMID38820530
PMCPMC11142678

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.