Key concepts for informed health choices: Where's the evidence?

One-year follow-up effects of the informed health choices secondary school intervention on students' ability to think critically about health in Uganda: a cluster randomized trial

INTRODUCTION

We assessed the effects of the Informed Health Choices (IHC) secondary school intervention on students' ability to think critically about choices 1 year after the intervention.

METHODS

We randomized eighty secondary schools to the intervention or control (usual curriculum). The schools were randomly selected from the central region of Uganda and included rural and urban, government, and privately-owned schools. One randomly selected class of year-2 students (ages 14-17) from each school participated in the trial. The intervention included a 2-day teacher training workshop, 10 lessons accessed online by teachers and delivered in classrooms during one school term (May-August 2022). The lessons addressed nine prioritized IHC concepts. We used two multiple-choice questions for each concept to evaluate the students' ability to think critically about choices at both the end of the school term and again after 1 year. The primary outcome was the proportion of students with a passing score (≥ 9 of 18 questions answered correctly) on the "Critical Thinking about Health" (CTH) test.

RESULTS

After 1-year, 71% (1749/2477) of the students in the intervention schools and 71% (1684/2376) of the students in the control schools completed the CTH test. In the intervention schools, 53% (934/1749) of students who completed the test had a passing score compared to 33% (557/1684) of students in the control schools (adjusted difference 22%, 95% CI 16-28).

CONCLUSIONS

The effect of the IHC secondary school intervention on students' ability to assess health-related claims was largely sustained for at least 1 year.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Pan African Clinical Trial Registry PACTR202204861458660. Registered on 4 April 2022.

Public participation in decisions about measures to manage the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, governments and health authorities faced tough decisions about infection prevention and control measures such as social distancing, face masks and travel. Judgements underlying those decisions require democratic input, as well as expert input. The aim of this review is to inform decisions about how best to achieve public participation in decisions about public health and social interventions in the context of a pandemic or other public health emergencies.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review examples of public participation in decisions by governments and health authorities about how to control the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

We searched Participedia and relevant databases in August 2022. Two authors reviewed titles and abstracts and one author screened publications promoted to full text. One author extracted data from included reports using a standard data-extraction form. A second author checked 10% of the extraction forms. We conducted a structured synthesis using framework analysis.

RESULTS

We included 24 reports (18 from Participedia). Most took place in high-income countries (n=23), involved 'consulting' the public (n=17) and involved public meetings (usually online). Two initiatives reported explicit support for critical thinking. 11 initiatives were formally evaluated (only three reported impacts). Many initiatives did not contribute to a decision, and 17 initiatives did not include any explicit decision-making criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Decisions about how to manage the COVID-19 pandemic affected nearly everyone. While public participation in those decisions had the potential to improve the quality of the judgements and decisions that were made, build trust, improve adherence and help ensure transparency and accountability, few examples of such initiatives have been reported and most of those have not been formally evaluated. Identified initiatives did point out potential good practices related to online engagement, crowdsourcing and addressing potential power imbalance. Future research should address improved reporting of initiatives, explicit decision-making criteria, support for critical thinking, engagement of marginalised groups and decision-makers and communication with the public.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

358991.

Evaluating health claim assessment skills of parents with preschool children: A cross-sectional study using Informed Health Choices Claim Evaluation Tool

Background

Health literacy is a global problem and is particularly relevant when making health care decisions about small children. We analysed how parents of preschool children assess health claims and explored the predictors of their assessment skill.

Methods

We conducted a survey with questions from the Claim Evaluation Tools (CET) database, part of the Informed Health Choices (IHC) project, in ten paediatric primary care practices of the Split-Dalmatia County Health Center, Split, Croatia, from 1 February to 31 March 2023. Eligible participants were parents accompanying preschool-aged children for check-ups. We also collected data on parents' and children's demographic and health characteristics (including the presence of any chronic illness in the child), visits to paediatric emergency service, hospitalisations, vaccination status, the presence of chronic illness of parents or relatives, and whether parents had to made treatment decisions for themselves and/or their family member.

Results

Overall, 402 parents of preschool children (median age 35 years (interquartile range (IQR) = 31.0-38.3)) had a median IHC CET test score of 10.0 (IQR = 8.0-11.0) out of 12 questions. The multiple regression analysis showed that female gender, higher level of education, being employed, and having a history of a visit to paediatric emergency service were significant predictors of the test score, explaining 21.9% of the variance.

Conclusions

Parents of preschool children have a very good ability for critical assessment of health-related statements in a complex health care system and an environment of generally unsatisfactory health literacy. Further studies should explore how parents understand health claims in different geographical, socio-economic and cultural setting, and explore educational interventions to increase critical thinking abilities and informed decision-making, especially among fathers, unemployed parents and those with lower levels of education.

Effects of the Informed Health Choices secondary school intervention on the ability of students in Rwanda to think critically about health choices: A cluster-randomized trial

AIM

The aim of this trial was to evaluate the effects of the Informed Health Choices intervention on the ability of students in Rwandan to think critically and make Informed Health Choices.

METHODS

We conducted a two-arm cluster-randomized trial in 84 lower secondary schools from 10 districts representing five provinces of Rwanda. We used stratified randomization to allocate schools to the intervention or control. One class in each intervention school had ten 40-min lessons taught by a trained teacher in addition to the usual curriculum. Control schools followed the usual curriculum. The primary outcome was a passing score (≥ 9 out of 18 questions answered correctly) for students on the Critical Thinking about Health Test completed within 2 weeks after the intervention. We conducted an intention-to-treat analysis using generalized linear mixed models, accounting for the cluster design using random intercepts.

RESULTS

Between February 25 and March 29, 2022, we recruited 3,212 participants. We assigned 1,572 students and 42 teachers to the intervention arm and 1,556 students and 42 teachers to the control arm. The proportion of students who passed the test in the intervention arm was 915/1,572 (58.2%) compared to 302/1,556 (19.4%) in the control arm, adjusted odds ratio 10.6 (95% CI: 6.3-17.8), p < 0.0001, adjusted difference 37.2% (95% CI: 29.5%-45.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention is effective in helping students think critically about health choices. It was possible to improve students' ability to think critically about health in the context of a competence-based curriculum in Rwanda, despite challenging postpandemic conditions.

Use of the informed health choices educational intervention to improve secondary students' ability to think critically about health interventions in Uganda: A cluster-randomized trial

AIM

The aim was to evaluate the effect of the Informed Health Choices (IHC) educational intervention on secondary students' ability to assess health-related claims and make informed choices.

METHODS

In a cluster-randomized trial, we randomized 80 secondary schools (students aged 13-17 years) in Uganda to the intervention or control (usual curriculum). The intervention included a 2-day teacher training workshop, 10 lessons accessed online by teachers and delivered in one school term. The lesson plans were developed for classrooms equipped with a blackboard or a blackboard and projector. The lessons addressed nine prioritized concepts. We used two multiple-choice questions for each concept to evaluate the students' ability to assess claims and make informed choices. The primary outcome was the proportion of students with a passing score (≥9 of 18 questions answered correctly).

RESULTS

Eighty schools consented and were randomly allocated. A total of 2477 students in the 40 intervention schools and 2376 students in the 40 control schools participated in this trial. In the intervention schools, 1364 (55%) of students that completed the test had a passing score compared with 586 (25%) of students in the control schools (adjusted difference 33%, 95% CI 26%-39%).

CONCLUSIONS

The IHC secondary school intervention improved students' ability to think critically and make informed choices. Well-designed digital resources may improve access to educational material, even in schools without computers or other information and communication technology (ICT). This could facilitate scaling-up use of the resources and help to address inequities associated with limited ICT access.

Effects of the Informed Health Choices secondary school intervention: A prospective meta-analysis

AIM

The aim of this prospective meta-analysis was to synthesize the results of three cluster-randomized trials of an intervention designed to teach lower-secondary school students (age 14-16) to think critically about health choices.

METHODS

We conducted the trials in Kenya, Rwanda, and Uganda. The intervention included a 2- to 3-day teacher training workshop, digital resources, and ten 40-min lessons. The lessons focused on nine key concepts. We did not intervene in control schools. The primary outcome was a passing score on a test (≥9 of 18 multiple-choice questions answered correctly). We performed random effects meta-analyses to estimate the overall adjusted odds ratios. Secondary outcomes included effects of the intervention on teachers.

RESULTS

Altogether, 244 schools (11,344 students) took part in the three trials. The overall adjusted odds ratio was 5.5 (95% CI: 3.0-10.2; p < 0.0001) in favor of the intervention (high certainty evidence). This corresponds to 33% (95% CI: 25-40%) more students in the intervention schools passing the test. Overall, 3397 (58%) of 5846 students in intervention schools had a passing score. The overall adjusted odds ratio for teachers was 13.7(95% CI: 4.6-40.4; p < 0.0001), corresponding to 32% (95% CI: 6%-57%) more teachers in the intervention schools passing the test (moderate certainty evidence). Overall, 118 (97%) of 122 teachers in intervention schools had a passing score.

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention led to a large improvement in the ability of students and teachers to think critically about health choices, but 42% of students in the intervention schools did not achieve a passing score.