Trial reportGlobal health, science and practice2024
Process Evaluation of Teaching Critical Thinking About Health Using the Informed Health Choices Intervention in Kenya: A Mixed Methods Study.
Trial report in Global health, science and practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Do studies of interventions to improve laypeople's critical thinking about health choices assess potential harms? A systematic review.BMJ open · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Interventions to promote critical health literacy: a scoping review.Health promotion international · 2026Article
- Exploring school nurses' potential to strengthen young people's resilience to misinformation by promoting critical health literacy in Norway.Health promotion international · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWe evaluated the Informed Health Choices secondary school intervention to help students in Kenya think critically about health choices. We conducted this process evaluation to explore if the intervention was implemented as planned, identify factors that facilitated or hindered implementation, potential benefits of the intervention, and how to scale up the intervention beyond the trial.
methodsThis was a mixed methods process evaluation nested in a cluster-randomized trial of the Informed Health Choices intervention. We analyzed quantitative data from teacher training evaluation forms completed by 39 teachers, 10 lesson evaluation forms completed by 40 teachers allocated to the intervention, and 72 structured classroom observation forms. We conducted a framework analysis of qualitative data from 14 group interviews (with 96 students, 23 teachers, and 18 parents) and 22 individual interviews (with 8 teachers, 5 school principals, 6 curriculum developers, and 3 policymakers). We assessed confidence in our findings from the qualitative analysis using a modified version of Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research.
resultsLesson objectives were achieved with minimal adaptations. Factors that might have facilitated the implementation of the intervention include teacher training; perceived value of the intervention by students, teachers, and policymakers; and support from school administration. Time constraints, teachers' heavy workloads, and the lessons not being included in the curriculum or national examination are factors that might have impeded implementation. Both students and teachers demonstrated the ability to apply key concepts that were taught to health choices and other choices. However, they experienced difficulties with 2 of the lessons.
conclusionScale-up of this intervention in Kenyan schools is feasible but may depend on adjusting the time allocated to teaching the lessons, modifying the 2 lessons that teachers and students found difficult, and including the lesson objectives and assessment in the national curriculum.
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.