2024-03-28T12:29:42Z
https://zenodo.org/oai2d
oai:zenodo.org:10252284
2023-12-03T09:23:43Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Informed Health Choices Network
2023-03-21
<p>A summary of the development, evaluation, and adaptation of IHC resources across more than 20 countries from the last year.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10252284
oai:zenodo.org:10252284
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10252283
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Informed Health Choices Newsletter 2023
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4748383
2021-05-12T13:48:12Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Andrew D.
Oxman, Matt
Semakula, Daniel
Chalmers, Iain
Chelagat, Faith
Kaseje, Margaret
Mugisha, Michael
Nsangi, Allen
Ssenyonga, Ronald
Sewankambo, Nelson
2019-12-03
<p>The Informed Health Choices (IHC) Key Concepts are principles for thinking critically about healthcare claims and deciding what to do. The Key Concepts provide a framework for designing curricula, learning resources, and evaluation tools. The objective of this study is to prioritise which of the 49 IHC Key Concepts to include in learning resources that we are developing for lower secondary schools in East Africa, and to determine the order in which the concepts should be learned, and the competences and dispositions needed to use those Key Concepts.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748383
oai:zenodo.org:4748383
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748382
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Prioritising and ordering Informed Health Choices (IHC) Key Concepts to be included in a secondary school resources: Protocol
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4765557
2021-05-16T13:48:08Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Nsangi, Allen
Semakula, Daniel
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Oxman, Matt
Morelli, Angela
Oxman, Andrew D
Glenton, Claire
Lewin, Simon
Austvoll-Dahlgren, Astrid
Kaseje, Margaret
Mugisha, Michael
Uwitonze, Anne-Marie
Nyirazinyoye, Laetitia
Chalmers, Iain
Fretheim, Atle
Sewankambo, Nelson K
2017-04-01
<p>The objectives of this research were to develop the Informed Health Choices (IHC) primary school resources, and to ensure that teachers and children experienced these resources as useful, usable, understandable, credible, desirable, and well-suited to them.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4765557
oai:zenodo.org:4765557
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4765556
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Development of the Informed Health Choices resources to teach primary school children to assess claims about treatment effects in four countries
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:6984730
2022-08-12T14:26:33Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Ssenyonga, Ronald
Lewin, Simon
Nakyejwe, Esther
Nsangi, Allen
Semakula, Daniel
Chesire, Faith
Mugisha, Michael
Oxman, Andrew D.
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Oxman, Matt
Kaseje, Margaret
Sewankambo, Nelson K.
2022-08-12
<p><strong>Background</strong></p>
<p>We designed the “<em>Be smart about your health</em>” digital resources to teach lower secondary school students how to assess the trustworthiness of claims about the effects of treatments. We shall evaluate effects of using these resources in a randomised trial in Uganda. This paper describes the process evaluation that will be conducted alongside this trial. The aim is to identify factors affecting the implementation, fidelity, effects, and scaling up use of the <em>Be smart about your health</em> teaching resources in Uganda and potential adverse and beneficial effects of the intervention.</p>
<p><strong>Methods</strong></p>
<p>Forty teachers from 40 schools in the intervention arm of the trial will complete a lesson evaluation questionnaire after each of the 10 lessons and at the end of the term. We will conduct structured classroom observations at all 40 schools. We will purposively select eight schools where we will conduct focus group discussions with teachers and students. We also will conduct key informant interviews among education officers (that visit the schools to monitor the implementation), teachers, head teachers, learners, and their parents. We will use a framework analysis approach to analyse the data.</p>
<p><strong>Expected results</strong></p>
<p>We anticipate that the findings from this evaluation will provide insights into factors that may impact the effectiveness of using the <em>Be smart about your health</em> resources, factors that can inhibit or facilitate scaling up use of the resources, and potential effects that were not measured quantitatively after the intervention, including transfer of what was learned to other contexts and adverse effects.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6984730
oai:zenodo.org:6984730
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6984729
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
critical thinking, health literacy, education, secondary school, randomized trial, adolescents, Uganda
Informed heath choices intervention to teach secondary school adolescents in Uganda to assess claims about treatment effects: A process evaluation protocol
info:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaper
oai:zenodo.org:4748252
2021-05-12T13:48:11Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Ikirezi, Aline
2021-06-01
<p>A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Public Health in the College of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Rwanda.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748252
oai:zenodo.org:4748252
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748251
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
A qualitative study exploring the suitability of Informed Health Choices resources translated into Kinyarwanda for use in primary schools: Case Of Remera Protestant Primary School In Kigali City
info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis
oai:zenodo.org:7510662
2023-01-08T02:26:48Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Informed Health Choices Group
2022-03-20
<p>A summary of activities of the Informed Health Choices Network over the last year.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7510662
oai:zenodo.org:7510662
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7510661
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Informed Health Choices Newsletter 2019
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4748333
2021-05-12T13:48:13Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Informed Health Choices Group
2018-01-09
<p>The Informed Health Choices (IHC) project started in January 2013 with a 5-year grant from the Research Council of Norway. In this update we summarise what we have accomplished with that support and what we see as the next steps in this work. Our aim is to enable people to think critically about health claims and choices.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748333
oai:zenodo.org:4748333
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748332
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
The Informed Healthcare Choices Group. Supporting informed healthcare choices in low-income countries – final report
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4748270
2021-05-12T13:48:11Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Andrew David
Austvoll-Dahlgren, Astrid
Garratt, Andrew
Rosenbaum, Sarah
2017-03-01
<p>We measured Norwegian adults’ under-standing of key concepts that are relevant to assessing claims about treatment effects in 2005, using nine multiple-choice questions. These questions were pre-cursors to the multiple-choice questions in the Claim Evaluation Tools database.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748270
oai:zenodo.org:4748270
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748269
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Understanding of key concepts relevant to assessing claims about treatment effects: a survey of Norwegian adults
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4765571
2023-01-06T20:12:02Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Nsangi, Allen
Semakula, Daniel
Glenton, Claire
Lewin, Simon
Oxman, Andrew D
Oxman, Matt
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Austvoll-Dahlgren, Astrid
Nyirazinyoye, Laetitia
Kaseje, Margaret
Fretheim, Atle
Sewankambo, Nelson K
2016-10-01
<p>The objectives of this research are to explore why the Informed Health Choices (IHC) primary school resources did or did not have intended effects and explain variations in effects, identify other potential adverse and beneficial effects than those that were measured in the trial, explore ways in which use of the primary school resources could be scaled up, and investigate the impact of the intervention on teachers and parents.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4765571
oai:zenodo.org:4765571
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4765570
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Resources to teach primary school children in low-income countries to assess claims about treatment effects: Protocol for a process evaluation
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4748420
2023-01-06T20:27:13Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Chesire, Faith
Mugisha, Michael
Oxman, Andrew D.
Oxman, Matt
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Ssenyonga, Ronald
2020-02-01
<p>When developing new, digital resources for secondary school students in Kenya, Rwanda and Uganda, we will explore issues that can impact eventual use and implementation of the new resources, in separate context analyses in each country. We will do this before starting to design the new resources, so we can address the issues in the design process.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748420
oai:zenodo.org:4748420
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748419
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Protocol for a context analysis: Exploring the considerations for introducing digital learning resources for critical thinking about health in secondary schools
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4748230
2021-05-12T13:48:14Z
openaire
user-informedhealthchoices
Krause, L. Kendall
Schwartz, Lisa
Woloshin, Steven
Oxman, Andrew David
2011-10-19
<p><strong>Background</strong>: People are frequently exposed to claims about the effects of health care. To make sense of this information, the public—including consumers, journalists, and decision-makers—need to know how to question and interpret the information presented, and when to seek additional information.</p>
<p><strong>Objectives</strong>: To create an inventory of interactive tools that teach the public the necessary skills to become critical consumers of health information.</p>
<p><strong>Methods</strong>: We systematically performed web (Google) and database (Medline) searches, and solicited input from key informants to identify tools which teach the public how to interpret information about the effects of health care. We included tools that are interactive (i.e. allow for some kind of two-way transfer of information), open-access, free, and web-based or downloadable. Potentially eligible tools were screened and coded independently by 2 of the authors.</p>
<p><strong>Results</strong>: Of the 3,148 potential tools initially identified, 63 were interactive and web-based or downloadable, including 20 which were free and open access (1 from the Medline database search, 9 from key informants, 10 from the web search). Among these, 15 targeted medical professionals/students. Only 5 targeted the public (4 in English, 1 in Italian). Interactive elements of these tools included: multimedia presentations (e.g. narrated PowerPoint presentation, cartoon animation), quizzes (users enter answers and receive feedback), and an annotated newspaper story. Skills covered included: study design, bias, risk, where and how to search, and how to appraise research evidence. Only 1 of the tools underwent formal evaluation for effectiveness (a non-randomized, controlled study).</p>
<p><strong>Conclusions</strong>: Few free open-access interactive tools are available to help people become critical consumers of information about the effects of health care.</p>
Abstracts of the 19th Cochrane Colloquium, Madrid, Spain, 2011, 157.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748230
oai:zenodo.org:4748230
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748229
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Interactive tools to teach the public to be critical consumers of information about health care: What's out there?
info:eu-repo/semantics/conferencePoster
oai:zenodo.org:4748274
2021-05-12T13:48:11Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Semakula, Daniel
Nsangi, Allen
Oxman, Andrew D.
Sewankambo, Nelson K.
Guttersrud, Øystein
Austvoll-Dahlgren, Astrid
2017-03-17
<p>The purpose of this study was to evaluate two sets of multiple-choice questions (tests), selected for use in randomised trials of Informed Health Choices learning resources in Uganda, administrated as oral tests in Luganda and as written tests in English.<br>
</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748274
oai:zenodo.org:4748274
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748273
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Measuring ability to assess claims about treatment effects in English and Luganda: evaluation of multiple-choice questions from the "Claim Evaluation Tools" database using Rasch modelling
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4746689
2021-05-11T01:48:11Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Andrew David
Chalmers, Iain
Dahlgren, Astrid
The Informed Health Choices Group
2019-12-11
<p>The Informed Health Choices (IHC) Key Concepts serve as the basis for developing learning resources to help people understand and apply the concepts when claims about the effects of treatments (and other interventions) are made, and when they make health choices. They are also the basis for an item bank of multiple-choice questions (the Claim Evaluation Tools item bank) that can be used for assessing people’s ability to apply the IHC Key Concepts.</p>
<p>The concepts are principles for evaluating the trustworthiness of treatment claims, comparisons, and choices. The concepts can help people to recognise when a claim about the effects of treatments has an untrustworthy basis, recognise when evidence from comparisons of treatments is trustworthy and when it is not, and make well-informed choices about treatments.</p>
<p>They can help anyone, not just researchers, to think critically about whether to believe a treatment claim and what to do. This is sometimes referred to as critical health literacy. We have not included concepts that are only relevant for researchers or that require a research background. The Key Concepts are intended for people using research, not for doing research.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4746689
oai:zenodo.org:4746689
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4746640
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Key Concepts for assessing claims about treatment effects and making well-informed treatment choices
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4748287
2021-05-12T13:48:13Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Informed Health Choices Group
2017-12-01
<p>We created the Informed Health Choices (IHC) podcast to teach the parents of primary school children in Uganda to assess claims about treatment effects and to make informed health choices, and evaluated it in a randomised trial where it was shown to have a large positive effect. Podcast available in <a href="https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLeMvL6ApG1N0ySWBxPNEDpD4tf1ZxrBfv">English</a> or <a href="https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLeMvL6ApG1N0M2EVhiDTKNe-QF67k2ZE9">Luganda</a>.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748287
oai:zenodo.org:4748287
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748286
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
The Informed Health Choices group. Guide for translating and adapting the Informed Health Choices (IHC) podcast
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4748366
2021-05-12T13:48:14Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Martinez, Laura
2019-03-13
<p>We created this guide to support people who are planning and carrying out translations of the Health Choices Book (or other Informed Health Choices learning resources). More specifically, this guide is about choosing a technical approach and working with the different types of files.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748366
oai:zenodo.org:4748366
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748365
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Resource production guide for translating and adapting Informed Health Choices learning resources
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:7542970
2023-01-18T14:26:42Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Verdugo-Paiva, Francisca
Novillo, Francisco
Peña, Javiera
Ávila-Oliver, Camila
Rada, Gabriel
2023-01-17
<p>This is the partial report of the search screening for the update of the systematic review of educational interventions designed to improve people’s understanding of key concepts for evaluating claims about the effects of health interventions. We performed a comprehensive search in CENTRAL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and Epistemonikos database from January 2015 up to 20 December 2022. Only three articles were identified. These were additional references of trials included in the original version of the review.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7542970
oai:zenodo.org:7542970
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7542969
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Screening (partial report). Update of: Educational interventions to improve people's understanding of key concepts in assessing the effects of health interventions
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4748379
2021-05-12T13:48:14Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Austvoll-Dahlgren, Astrid
Oxman, Andrew D.
Chalmers, Iain
2019-11-09
<p>This manual describes the rationale and use of the Claim Evaluation Tools and will guide you in preparing a test or questionnaire for your purposes, whether you are a teacher or a researcher. The items were developed as part of the Informed Health Choices project, and can be used for creating tests to be used in school and other learning settings, as outcome measures in evaluations of educational interventions, or in surveys to map abilities in a population.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748379
oai:zenodo.org:4748379
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748378
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Manual for preparing a test or questionnaire based on the Claim Evaluation Tools database
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4765547
2021-05-16T13:48:08Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Semakula, Daniel
Nsangi, Allen
Oxman, Matt
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Oxman, Andrew D
Austvoll-Dahlgren, Astrid
Glenton, Claire
Lewin, Simon
Kaseje, Margaret
Morelli, Angela
Fretheim, Atle
Sewankambo, Nelson K
2018-02-01
<p>The objective of this research was to design mass media resources to enable the public to assess the trustworthiness of claims about the effects (benefits and harms) of treatments, and make appropriate health choices.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4765547
oai:zenodo.org:4765547
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4765546
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Development of mass media resources to improve the ability of parents of primary school children in Uganda to assess the trustworthiness of claims about the benefits and harms of treatments
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:10184410
2023-11-22T09:28:49Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Chesire, Faith
Kaseje, Margaret
Ochieng, Marlyn
Mugisha, Michael
Ssenyonga, Ronald
Oxman, Matt
Nsangi, Allen
Semakula, Daniel
Nyirazinyoye, Laetitia
Dahlgren, Astrid
Lewin, Simon
Sewankambo, Nelson K.
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Oxman, Andrew D.
Rose, Christopher James
2023-11-22
<p><strong>Background</strong>: There is an overabundance of claims about the advantages and disadvantages of health interventions. Many people are unable to assess the reliability of these claims. Acting on unreliable health claims or failing to act on reliable advice can lead to waste of resources and unnecessary suffering. There is a global focus on teaching critical thinking, including in the new Kenyan curriculum, however, critical thinking about health is not taught in Kenyan schools.</p>
<p>The study planned for in this protocol is an evaluation of the effects of the Informed Health Choices secondary school intervention on the ability of lower secondary school students in Kenya to think critically about health information and choices. The intervention consists of providing teachers with digital teaching resources and training them to deliver the intervention to students. The intervention covers 10 lessons that address nine key concepts.</p>
<p><strong>Methods</strong>: This study is a cluster-randomized trial. We will stratify lower secondary schools by ownership and geographical location, and randomly select 80 of them. We will randomly allocate the schools to either the intervention or control group. The intervention schools will teach the 10 lessons in one academic term alongside the Kenya national secondary school curriculum. The control schools will continue teaching the national secondary school curriculum. The primary outcome measure will be a test with multiple-choice questions from the Claim Evaluations Tools item bank. The test will include two items for each of the nine concepts covered by the teaching resources. The primary outcome will be the proportion of students attaining a predetermined passing score.</p>
<p><strong>Trial registration</strong>: Pan African Clinical Trial Registry, trial identifier: PACTR202204883917313. Registered on 05/04/2022.</p>
<p>An amendment to the protocol describing plans for sensitivity analyses to address missing outcome data for the one-year follow-up has been uploaded (Protocol amendment 1-year follow-up sensitivity analyses.pdf).</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10184410
oai:zenodo.org:10184410
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6562939
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
critical thinking
critical thinking about health
secondary school curriculum
adolescents
treatment claims
health information
Kenya
Effects of the Informed Health Choices secondary school intervention on the ability of lower secondary students in Kenya to think critically about health information and choices: Protocol for a cluster-randomized trial
info:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaper
oai:zenodo.org:10184698
2023-11-22T10:01:01Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Ssenyonga, Ronald
Oxman, Andrew D.
Nakyejwe, Esther
Mugagga, Solomon K.
Nsangi, Allen
Semakula, Daniel
Chesire, Faith
Mugisha, Michael
Lewin, Simon
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Oxman, Matt
Kaseje, Margaret
Sewankambo, Nelson K.
Rose, Christopher James
2023-11-22
<p>Background</p>
<p>To make well-informed choices, people must possess skills to assess the trustworthiness of health-related claims. It is important that young people learn to assess the reliability of claims to inform decisions, both when making their own choices and as citizens participating in a democracy. This trial aims to evaluate the effect of the Informed Health Choices (IHC) teaching resources on secondary school students’ ability to assess health-related claims and make informed choices.</p>
<p>Methods</p>
<p>This will be a two-arm cluster-randomised trial. We will randomise 80 lower secondary schools to evaluate the IHC secondary school digital teaching resources. The resources for teachers include 10 lessons to be delivered in a single school term, using lesson plans developed for classrooms equipped with only a blackboard or with a projector. Teachers in the intervention arm will be invited to a three-day teacher training workshop. Teachers in the control schools will continue teaching the national curriculum. Uganda’s National Curriculum Development Centre introduced a new competence-based curriculum in 2020. This curriculum has critical thinking as one of seven generic skills to be taught across all subjects. The curriculum does not explicitly include critical thinking about health. The IHC lessons address nine prioritised key concepts. We will use multiple choice questions – two for each key concept - to evaluate the student’s ability to assess claims and make informed choices. We will measure the proportion of students with a passing score at the end of the school term, and again after one year to assess retention of what was learned.</p>
<p>Expected results</p>
<p>Based on previous work done in Ugandan primary schools, we anticipate that the use of the teaching resources will lead to a large improvement in the lower secondary school students’ ability to assess claims and make informed health choices.</p>
<p>An amendment to the protocol describing plans for sensitivity analyses to address missing outcome data for the one-year follow-up has been uploaded (Protocol amendment 1-year follow-up sensitivity analyses.pdf).</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10184698
oai:zenodo.org:10184698
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6560217
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
critical thinking
health literacy
education
secondary school
randomized trial
adolescents
Uganda
Does the use of the Informed Health Choices teaching resources improve the secondary students' ability to critically think about health in Uganda? A cluster randomised trial protocol
info:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaper
oai:zenodo.org:6976952
2022-08-10T02:26:13Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Matt
2022-08-09
<p><strong>Background</strong></p>
<p>Researchers often overlook potential adverse effects of educational and public health interventions. Adverse effects of an intervention are increases in adverse outcomes, or decreases in beneficial outcomes, attributed to the intervention in a randomised trial. In a previous study, we developed a framework of potential adverse effects of an intervention intended to improve critical thinking about health choices: the IHC secondary school intervention. The framework includes potential effects on both students and teachers. In this study, building on the framework, we will develop and evaluate (validate) questionnaire items (questions), for measuring outcomes identified in the development of the framework. In a separate, subsequent study, we will conduct a quantitative evaluation of the items.</p>
<p><strong>Objectives</strong></p>
<ol>
<li>Prioritise potential adverse effects of the IHC secondary school intervention, for the 1-year-follow-up assessments of the trials of the intervention</li>
<li>Develop and evaluate questionnaire items for measuring potential adverse effects, focusing on those that we have prioritised</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>Methods</strong></p>
<p>The overarching steps of this study are 1) prioritising outcomes included in the framework developed previously; 3) brainstorming and drafting questionnaire items; and 3) conducting a qualitative evaluation of the items. </p>
<p><strong>Results</strong></p>
<p>Results of the study will include:</p>
<ul>
<li>a set of potential adverse effects (increases in adverse outcomes) prioritised for the trials of the IHC secondary school intervention, and</li>
<li>measures of potential adverse outcomes that have been qualitatively evaluated.</li>
</ul>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6976952
oai:zenodo.org:6976952
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6976951
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Assessing potential adverse effects of an educational intervention: protocol for development and evaluation of questionnaire items [Version 1, awaiting peer review]
info:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaper
oai:zenodo.org:8026599
2023-06-12T14:26:51Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Andrew D.
Mugisha, Michael
Chesire, Faith
Ssenyonga, Ronald
Rose, Christopher J.
Nsangi, Allen
Kaseje, Margaret
Sewankambo, Nelson K.
Dahlgren, Astrid
Lewin, Simon
Moberg, Jenny
Rosenbaum, Sarah
2022-05-31
<p>As noted in the <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6597492">protocol</a>, we planned to assess potential adverse effects and use of what was learned in daily life (far transfer) in the one-year follow-up studies. This addendum to the protocol describes how we will do this.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8026599
oai:zenodo.org:8026599
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6597492
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
critical thinking, health literacy, education, secondary school, systematic review, individual participant-level data meta-analysis
Effects of using the Informed Health Choices secondary school resources: protocol for a prospective meta-analysis addendum
info:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaper
oai:zenodo.org:7712043
2023-03-10T02:26:55Z
openaire_data
user-informedhealthchoices
Chesire, Faith
Mugisha, Michael
Ssenyonga, Ronald
Oxman, Matt
Ochieng, Marlyn
Simbi, Clarisse Marie Claudine
Nakyejwe, Esther
Ngatia, Benson
Muggaga, Solomon Kevin
Rosenbaum, Sarah
2023-03-03
<p>A qualitative dataset for the article: Teaching critical thinking about health information and choices in secondary schools: human-centred design of digital resources</p>
<p>We collected this data in Phase 2 of the work described in the article, to inform development of educational resources (<em>Be Smart About Your Health</em>) to support teaching critical thinking about health claims and making informed health choices for use in secondary schools, based on a set of Informed Health Choices Key Concepts. </p>
<p>Data collection methods: individual and group interviews, observation of classroom pilots, in Kenya, Rwanda, and Uganda, and via email from an international advisory group. Timeframe for data collection and analysis: 2020-2022</p>
<p>This dataset is a part of the research project: <em>Enabling sustainable public engagement in improving health and health equity, </em>2019-2024. Funded by GLOBVAC programme, Research Council of Norway. </p>
<p> </p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7712043
oai:zenodo.org:7712043
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7695782
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
critical health literacy
informed health choices
human centred design
informed decision making
Dataset for "Teaching critical thinking about health information and choices in secondary schools: human-centred design of digital resources"
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
oai:zenodo.org:4748344
2021-05-12T13:48:13Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Matt
2021-04-26
<p>Unreliable information about health care, combined with the inability to assess the reliability of such information, can lead to uninformed decisions and, ultimately, waste and unnecessary suffering. Journalism is a particularly important source of health information. There have been several scientific studies of the quality (reliability) of news media reports about the effects of health interventions. There does not appear to be a systematic review of these studies. The planned review is intended to inform: the production and consumption<br>
of health news; as well as further research, including the development of interventions to help people assess health care information in the news, so they can make well-informed decisions.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748344
oai:zenodo.org:4748344
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748343
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Quality of news media reports about the effects and costs of health interventions: Systematic review protocol
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4748239
2021-05-12T13:48:12Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Matthew
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Nsangi, Allen
Semakula, Daniel
Morelli, Angela
Austvoll-Dahlgren, Astrid
Oxman, Andrew D.
Sewankambo, Nelson K.
Kaseje, Margaret
Nyirazinyoye, Laetitia
Glenton, Claire
Lewin, Simon
2016-03-01
<p>To make well-informed healthcare choices, they must be able to assess the reliability of those claims. We have developed the Informed Health Choices (IHC) primary school resources to help enable them to do this.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748239
oai:zenodo.org:4748239
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748238
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Teachers' Guide for The Health Choices Book: Learning to think carefully about treatments. A health science book for primary school children
info:eu-repo/semantics/book
oai:zenodo.org:4748250
2021-05-12T13:48:14Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Mugisha, Michael
2016-06-01
<p>A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Public Health in the College of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Rwanda.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748250
oai:zenodo.org:4748250
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748249
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Piloting primary school teaching resources for informed health care choices in an urban school in Kigali, Rwanda: a qualitative study
info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis
oai:zenodo.org:4746388
2021-05-10T18:37:45Z
user-informedhealthchoices
The Informed Health Choices Group
2021-03-01
<p>A summary of the development, evaluation and adaptation of IHC resources across more than 20 countries from the last year.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4746388
oai:zenodo.org:4746388
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4746387
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Informed Health Choices Newsletter 2021
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
oai:zenodo.org:6581224
2022-05-26T08:39:33Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Camilla Alderighi
Raffaele Rasoini
Giulio Formoso
Maria Grazia Celani
Sarah E. Rosenbaum
2022-05-25
<p><strong>Background</strong></p>
<p>The Informed Health Choices (IHC) project team developed learning resources for primary school children to teach critical thinking about treatments claims and health choices and evaluated their effect in a cluster randomized controlled trial of 120 schools in Uganda in 2016. Children taught with the IHC resources showed a better ability to think critically about treatments claims and health choices than children not taught with these resources. Teams in multiple countries are contextualising the IHC resources for use in other languages and settings; in this pilot we describe contextualizing the resources for use in Italian primary schools. </p>
<p><strong>Methods</strong></p>
<p>After translating IHC learning resources to Italian and holding an introductory workshop with participating schoolteachers, we piloted the resources with two classes of a primary school in Florence over nine lessons. The aims of this study were: 1) to assess the feasibility of introducing the IHC curriculum in Italian primary school; 2) to evaluate the pilot students’ ability to assess health claims and make informed health choices; to explore 3) students’ and 4) teachers’ experiences with the IHC learning resources; 5) to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation of the IHC learning resources in Italian primary schools. To assess these objectives, we used both qualitative and quantitative methods.</p>
<p><strong>Results</strong></p>
<p>Both qualitative and quantitative analyses consistently showed that the IHC learning resources had a positive impact on the objectives we examined. The resources integrated well into the Italian primary school curriculum. Both students and teachers considered these resources highly comprehensible, appealing in design and content, and stimulating for the development of a critical attitude. The only barrier teachers and students expressed experiencing during the pilot was using the resources in a remote learning context (initiated in the final stages of the pilot due to school lockdown). </p>
<p><strong>Conclusions</strong></p>
<p>Findings from our contextualisation of IHC learning resources in Italian primary schools indicate that these resources are well-suited for Italian teachers and students in an Italian primary school context and compatible with the Italian primary school curriculum. </p>
<p> </p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6581224
oai:zenodo.org:6581224
eng
Zenodo
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6580963
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6580962
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Critical thinking, evidence-based medicine, informed health choices, critical health literacy, health literacy, public health
Feasibility of contextualizing the Informed Health Choices learning resources in Italy: A pilot study in a primary school in Florence
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
oai:zenodo.org:6580963
2022-05-26T08:39:33Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Camilla Alderighi
Raffaele Rasoini
Giulio Formoso
Maria Grazia Celani
Sarah E. Rosenbaum
2022-05-25
<p><strong>Background</strong></p>
<p>The Informed Health Choices (IHC) project team developed learning resources for primary school children to teach critical thinking about treatments claims and health choices and evaluated their effect in a cluster randomized controlled trial of 120 schools in Uganda in 2016. Children taught with the IHC resources showed a better ability to think critically about treatments claims and health choices than children not taught with these resources. Teams in multiple countries are contextualising the IHC resources for use in other languages and settings; in this pilot we describe contextualizing the resources for use in Italian primary schools. </p>
<p><strong>Methods</strong></p>
<p>After translating IHC learning resources to Italian and holding an introductory workshop with participating schoolteachers, we piloted the resources with two classes of a primary school in Florence over nine lessons. The aims of this study were: 1) to assess the feasibility of introducing the IHC curriculum in Italian primary school; 2) to evaluate the pilot students’ ability to assess health claims and make informed health choices; to explore 3) students’ and 4) teachers’ experiences with the IHC learning resources; 5) to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation of the IHC learning resources in Italian primary schools. To assess these objectives, we used both qualitative and quantitative methods.</p>
<p><strong>Results</strong></p>
<p>Both qualitative and quantitative analyses consistently showed that the IHC learning resources had a positive impact on the objectives we examined. The resources integrated well into the Italian primary school curriculum. Both students and teachers considered these resources highly comprehensible, appealing in design and content, and stimulating for the development of a critical attitude. The only barrier teachers and students expressed experiencing during the pilot was using the resources in a remote learning context (initiated in the final stages of the pilot due to school lockdown). </p>
<p><strong>Conclusions</strong></p>
<p>Findings from our contextualisation of IHC learning resources in Italian primary schools indicate that these resources are well-suited for Italian teachers and students in an Italian primary school context and compatible with the Italian primary school curriculum. </p>
<p> </p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6580963
oai:zenodo.org:6580963
eng
Zenodo
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6580963
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6580962
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Critical thinking, evidence-based medicine, informed health choices, critical health literacy, health literacy, public health
Feasibility of contextualizing the Informed Health Choices learning resources in Italy: A pilot study in a primary school in Florence
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
oai:zenodo.org:6562788
2022-05-20T01:49:34Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Mugisha, Michael
Nyirazinyoye, Laetitia
Simbi, Clarisse Marie Claudine
Chesire, Faith
Ssenyonga, Ronald
Oxman, Matt
Nsangi, Allen
Semakula, Daniel
Dahlgren, Astrid
Kaseje, Margaret
Lewin, Simon
Sewankambo, Nelson K.
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Oxman, Andrew D.
2022-05-19
<p><strong>Background</strong>: Young people are exposed to many claims about the effects of things they can do to protect or improve health. To make good health choices, they need the ability to assess the reliability of those claims critically. Critical thinking is a core competence in the Rwandan secondary school curriculum and in many countries. However, critical thinking about health is rarely taught in Rwanda. Digital secondary school resources for critical thinking about health can potentially address this gap and if published be widely disseminated at low cost. The objective of the planned study is to evaluate the effects of using digital secondary school resources to help students learn to think critically about health.</p>
<p><strong>Methods:</strong> We will conduct a two-arm cluster-randomized trial. We will randomly select 84 lower secondary schools from 10 districts representing all five provinces of Rwanda. Using stratified random allocation, we will assign 84 schools to the intervention or control arm. Schools in the intervention arm will teach 10-lessons after teacher training on the content of the secondary school resources. Schools in the control arm will not receive any training and resources. They will carry on with teaching the national curriculum. The primary outcome will be the proportion of students with a predetermined passing score on a test with multiple-choice questions from the Claim Evaluation Tools item bank. The questions measure the ability to apply key concepts related to assessing health claims and making informed health choices. The test will include two questions addressing each of the nine concepts covered by the secondary school resources.</p>
<p><strong>Discussion</strong>: This is one of three randomized trials to assess the effects of the Informed Health Choices secondary school resources in Rwanda, Kenya, and Uganda. The findings will inform decisions about how to promote critical thinking about health. <strong>Trial registration: </strong>Pan African Clinical Trial Registry, trial identifier: PACTR202203880375077, Registered on 15th February 2022.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6562788
oai:zenodo.org:6562788
ang
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6562787
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
critical thinking
secondary school curriculum
adolescents
treatment claims
health literacy
Rwanda
Effects of using the Informed Health Choices digital secondary school resources on the ability of Rwandan students to think critically about health: protocol for a cluster-randomised trial
info:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaper
oai:zenodo.org:6562940
2022-05-20T01:49:33Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Chesire, Faith
Kaseje, Margaret
Ochieng, Marlyn
Mugisha, Michael
Ssenyonga, Ronald
Oxman, Matt
Nsangi, Allen
Semakula, Daniel
Nyirazinyoye, Laetitia
Dahlgren, Astrid
Lewin, Simon
Sewankambo, Nelson K.
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Oxman, Andrew D.
2022-05-19
<p><strong>Background</strong>: There is an overabundance of claims about the advantages and disadvantages of health interventions. Many people are unable to assess the reliability of these claims. Acting on unreliable health claims or failing to act on reliable advice can lead to waste of resources and unnecessary suffering. There is a global focus on teaching critical thinking, including in the new Kenyan curriculum, however, critical thinking about health is not taught in Kenyan schools.</p>
<p>The study planned for in this protocol is an evaluation of the effects of the Informed Health Choices secondary school intervention on the ability of lower secondary school students in Kenya to think critically about health information and choices. The intervention consists of providing teachers with digital teaching resources and training them to deliver the intervention to students. The intervention covers 10 lessons that address nine key concepts.</p>
<p><strong>Methods</strong>: This study is a cluster-randomized trial. We will stratify lower secondary schools by ownership and geographical location, and randomly select 80 of them. We will randomly allocate the schools to either the intervention or control group. The intervention schools will teach the 10 lessons in one academic term alongside the Kenya national secondary school curriculum. The control schools will continue teaching the national secondary school curriculum. The primary outcome measure will be a test with multiple-choice questions from the Claim Evaluations Tools item bank. The test will include two items for each of the nine concepts covered by the teaching resources. The primary outcome will be the proportion of students attaining a predetermined passing score.</p>
<p><strong>Trial registration</strong>: Pan African Clinical Trial Registry, trial identifier: PACTR202204883917313. Registered on 05/04/2022.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6562940
oai:zenodo.org:6562940
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6562939
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
critical thinking
critical thinking about health
secondary school curriculum
adolescents
treatment claims
health information
Kenya
Effects of the Informed Health Choices secondary school intervention on the ability of lower secondary students in Kenya to think critically about health information and choices: Protocol for a cluster-randomized trial
info:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaper
oai:zenodo.org:10184664
2023-11-22T09:55:45Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Mugisha, Michael
Nyirazinyoye, Laetitia
Simbi, Clarisse Marie Claudine
Chesire, Faith
Ssenyonga, Ronald
Oxman, Matt
Nsangi, Allen
Semakula, Daniel
Dahlgren, Astrid
Kaseje, Margaret
Lewin, Simon
Sewankambo, Nelson K.
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Oxman, Andrew D.
Rose, Christopher James
2023-11-22
<p><strong>Background</strong>: Young people are exposed to many claims about the effects of things they can do to protect or improve health. To make good health choices, they need the ability to assess the reliability of those claims critically. Critical thinking is a core competence in the Rwandan secondary school curriculum and in many countries. However, critical thinking about health is rarely taught in Rwanda. Digital secondary school resources for critical thinking about health can potentially address this gap and if published be widely disseminated at low cost. The objective of the planned study is to evaluate the effects of using digital secondary school resources to help students learn to think critically about health.</p>
<p><strong>Methods:</strong> We will conduct a two-arm cluster-randomized trial. We will randomly select 84 lower secondary schools from 10 districts representing all five provinces of Rwanda. Using stratified random allocation, we will assign 84 schools to the intervention or control arm. Schools in the intervention arm will teach 10-lessons after teacher training on the content of the secondary school resources. Schools in the control arm will not receive any training and resources. They will carry on with teaching the national curriculum. The primary outcome will be the proportion of students with a predetermined passing score on a test with multiple-choice questions from the Claim Evaluation Tools item bank. The questions measure the ability to apply key concepts related to assessing health claims and making informed health choices. The test will include two questions addressing each of the nine concepts covered by the secondary school resources.</p>
<p><strong>Discussion</strong>: This is one of three randomized trials to assess the effects of the Informed Health Choices secondary school resources in Rwanda, Kenya, and Uganda. The findings will inform decisions about how to promote critical thinking about health. <strong>Trial registration: </strong>Pan African Clinical Trial Registry, trial identifier: PACTR202203880375077, Registered on 15th February 2022.</p>
<p>An amendment to the protocol describing plans for sensitivity analyses to address missing outcome data for the one-year follow-up has been uploaded (Protocol amendment 1-year follow-up sensitivity analyses.pdf).</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10184664
oai:zenodo.org:10184664
ang
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6562787
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
critical thinking
secondary school curriculum
adolescents
treatment claims
health literacy
Rwanda
Effects of using the Informed Health Choices digital secondary school resources on the ability of Rwandan students to think critically about health: protocol for a cluster-randomised trial
info:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaper
oai:zenodo.org:4748323
2021-05-12T13:48:14Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Informed Health Choices Group
2017-12-01
<p>The Informed Health Choices primary school resources are created for late primary school children (10 to 12 year olds). We developed the resources between 2013 and 2015, using a human-centred design approach with several cycles of prototyping, pilot testing and feedback from children, teachers and other stakeholders in Uganda, Kenya, Rwanda and Norway.</p>
<p>We evaluated the effects of these resources in Uganda, where we randomly allocated half of 120 schools (over 10,000 year-five students). Teachers taught the lessons over a period of nine weeks, with one double lesson (80 minutes) per week during a single term. We compared the ability of the children in those schools to apply 12 of the Key Concepts to the ability of the children in the other schools, and found a large positive effect [Nsangi 2017a]. In a follow-up study, we found that this effect was sustained after one year.</p>
<p>Project partners are translating, adapting and evaluating resources for use in other languages and settings. We welcome new partners.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748323
oai:zenodo.org:4748323
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748322
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
The Informed Health Choices group. Guide for piloting the Informed Health Choices (IHC) school resources
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4748279
2021-05-12T13:48:13Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Davies, Alun
Gerrity, Martha
Nordheim, Lena
Okebukola, Peter
Opiyo, Newton
Sharples, Jonathan
Wilson, Helen
Wysonge, Charles
Austvoll-Dahlgren, Astrid
Oxman, Andrew David
2017-01-09
<p>The objectives of this study were to determine cut-off scores for passing (having at least a borderline ability to apply the concepts) and mastery (having mastered the concepts) for the Informed Health Choices primary school and podcast tests.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748279
oai:zenodo.org:4748279
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748278
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Measuring ability to assess claims about treatment effects: establishment of a standard for passing and mastery
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:7702264
2023-03-07T02:26:39Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Moberg, Jenny
2023-03-06
<p>This report is a description of how we developed a searchable collection of examples of health actions for use in the <em>Be Smart About Your Health</em> (<em>Be Smart)</em> resources for secondary school students in East Africa. </p>
besmarthealth.org/health-actions
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7702264
oai:zenodo.org:7702264
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7702263
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Creating an examples collection for the "Be Smart About Your Health" resources: part of the CHOICE project
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4765932
2021-05-17T13:48:13Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Nsangi, Allen
2020-12-11
<p>The Informed Health Choices project aimed to teach children to think critically about health claims and choices. The goal was to enable them to make informed personal choices, participate in policy debates and contribute to informed health policy decisions when they are older – as patients, future health professionals, future policy makers and citizens. The first objective of this thesis was to develop resources that teach primary school children in Uganda to assess health claims and make informed health choices. The second objective was to evaluate the impact of the resources on children’s ability to think critically about health claims and choices. The third objective was to explore unintended consequences and factors that might affect scaling up use of the resources. The fourth objective was to ascertain if children retained what they learned for at least one year.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4765932
oai:zenodo.org:4765932
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4765931
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
An educational intervention to enable children to assess claims about the benefits and harms of treatments
info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis
oai:zenodo.org:4765543
2023-01-06T20:20:59Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Andrew D.
Martínez García, Laura
2018-08-29
<p>We present here a plan for reviewing frameworks for critical thinking. The findings of this review will inform further development of the IHC Key Concepts, development of related frameworks, and use of such frameworks.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4765543
oai:zenodo.org:4765543
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4765542
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Comparison of the Informed Health Choices Key Concepts to other frameworks that are relevant to learning how to think critically about treatment claims, comparisons, and choices: protocol for a mapping review
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:7510212
2023-01-08T02:26:37Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Ikirezi, Aline
2023-01-06
<p>This study objectives are threefold: i) to explore the user experience of the IHC primary school resources among children and the teacher of primary five in Kinyarwanda; ii) to identify barriers and facilitators of the IHC school resources in Rwandan context for effective use; and iii) to incorporate users’ recommendations that can inform the next reiteration of these resources in the next development cycle (Version 3).</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7510212
oai:zenodo.org:7510212
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7510211
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
A qualitative study exploring the suitability of Informed Health Choices resources translated into Kinyarwanda for use in primary schools: Case of Remera Protestant Primary School In Kigali City
info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis
oai:zenodo.org:7510101
2023-01-08T02:26:47Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Glynn, Dara
2023-01-06
<p>The study aim was to explore the need for and, if necessary, to develop a contextualised version of the IHC programme, with the input of the relevant stakeholders, suitable for use in Irish primary schools.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7510101
oai:zenodo.org:7510101
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7510100
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Contextualising the Informed Health Choices (IHC) programme and resources for delivery in the Irish Primary School System
info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis
oai:zenodo.org:7510317
2023-01-08T02:26:39Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Moberg, Jenny
Austvoll-Dahlgren, Astrid
Treweek, Shaun
Badenoch, Douglas
Layfield, Robin
Harbour, Robin
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Oxman, Andrew D.
Atkinson, Patricia
Chalmers, Iain
2023-01-06
<p>Well-informed choices about how to intervene to improve health outcomes de-pend on access to reliable information, including research evidence. Many peo-ple (not only the public, but health professionals and policymakers too) have problems understanding some of the terminology used in describing evalua-tions of treatments. We have developed a glossary to provide plain language ex-planations and illustrations of 242 commonly used terms. The glossary is freely available at http://getitglossary.org and can be incorporated into documents providing support for evidence-informed healthcare decisions, and embedded in other websites serving a wide variety of functions.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7510317
oai:zenodo.org:7510317
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7510316
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
A plain language Glossary of Evaluation Terms for In-formed Treatment choices (GET-IT) at www.getitglos-sary.org
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:10184331
2023-11-22T09:46:16Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Chesire, Faith
Kaseje, Margaret
Ochieng, Marlyn
Mugisha, Michael
Ssenyonga, Ronald
Oxman, Matt
Nsangi, Allen
Semakula, Daniel
Nyirazinyoye, Laetitia
Dahlgren, Astrid
Sewankambo, Nelson K.
Oxman, Andrew D.
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Lewin, Simon
2023-11-22
<p><strong>Background</strong>: People frequently make decisions about what can improve their health. They do this based on large amounts of information that they get from different sources, which include claims about what harms or improves health. People therefore need skills to assess the trustworthiness of health claims. The Informed Health Choices (IHC) Key Concepts framework was used to develop the ‘Be Smart about your Health’ secondary school resources to help students in lower secondary to assess health claims about the effects of treatments. We are evaluating these resources in a cluster randomized trial in 80 lower secondary schools in Kenya. This protocol is for a process evaluation that will be conducted alongside the trial. The objective of this evaluation is to explore the extent to which the intervention was delivered as planned; understand factors that facilitated or hindered the delivery and impact of the resources; and antici-pated and unanticipated effects.</p>
<p><br>
<strong>Study design</strong>: We will employ a mixed-methods design using quantitative and qualita-tive data. We will collect quantitative data from all schools (n=40) allocated to the in-tervention arm using lesson evaluation forms. Our qualitative data collection will in-clude: (a) structured classroom observations in all schools (n=40), with at least one lesson observed in each school. In a sample of eight schools, we shall observe more than one lesson. (b) We will conduct focus group discussions (with students (n=4), teachers (n=1) and parents (n=4). (c) Key informant interviews with policymakers in education (n=5), teachers (n=8), and with school principals (n=8)). We will purposively select these schools based on location (urban and rural) and ownership (private and public).</p>
<p><br>
<strong>Data analysis</strong>: We will use framework analysis to analyze qualitative data and descrip-tive analysis to analyze quantitative data. We will summarize and appraise the confi-dence of the key findings from the qualitative data using a modified version of the GRADE-CERQual approach.</p>
<p>This version of the protocol was created by mistake. The protocol can be found here https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6919372 and should be cited as:</p><p>Chesire, F., Kaseje, M., Ochieng, M., Mugisha, M., Ssenyonga, R., Oxman, M., Nsangi, A., Semakula, D., Nyirazinyoye, L., Dahlgren, A., Sewankambo, N. K., Oxman, A. D., Rosenbaum, S., & Lewin, S. (2022). Effect of the Informed Health Choices digital secondary school resources on the ability of lower secondary students in Kenya to critically appraise health claims: protocol for a process evaluation (Version 5). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6919372 </p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10184331
oai:zenodo.org:10184331
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6919371
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
critical thinking, critical health literacy, secondary school curriculum, adolescents, treatment claims, health information, process evaluation, Kenya
Effect of the Informed Health Choices digital secondary school resources on the ability of lower secondary students in Kenya to critically appraise health claims: protocol for a process evaluation
info:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaper
oai:zenodo.org:7806140
2023-04-08T02:26:58Z
openaire_data
user-informedhealthchoices
Rosenbaum, Sarah
2023-04-06
<p>Individual user test interview guides and group interview guides for multiple stakeholders</p>
<p>Coreq checklist</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7806140
oai:zenodo.org:7806140
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7806139
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
critical thinking
critical health literacy
informed decision making
infodemic
health education
secondary school,
educational design
human centred design
Extended dataset and Coreq Checklist for 'Teaching critical thinking about health information and choices in secondary schools: human-centred design of digital resources"
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
oai:zenodo.org:6505129
2022-04-29T13:47:29Z
user-informedhealthchoices
The Informed Health Choices Group
2022-03-10
<p>A summary of the development, evaluation and adaptation of IHC resources across more than 20 countries from the last year.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6505129
oai:zenodo.org:6505129
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6505128
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
informed health choices
Informed Health Choices Newsletter 2022
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
oai:zenodo.org:10156226
2023-11-19T16:44:37Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Alderighi, Camilla
Sarah E. Rosenbaum
Celani, Maria Grazia
De Fiore, Rebecca
Ambrosino, Fabio
Formoso, Giulio
Rasoini, Raffaele
2023-11-19
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10156226
oai:zenodo.org:10156226
eng
Zenodo
other:https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6580963
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10156225
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Informedh Health Choices
critical health literacy
health literacy
critical thinking
evidence based medicine
education
health communication
Feasibility of contextualizing the Informed Health Choices learning resources in Italy: protocol for a study in the North, Centre and South of Italy.
info:eu-repo/semantics/preprint
oai:zenodo.org:6976925
2022-08-10T02:26:15Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Matt
2022-08-09
<p><strong>Background</strong></p>
<p>The value of a formal education is limited if people are unable to use or “transfer” what they learn in school to other contexts. However, there is uncertainty about how to achieve and evaluate transfer of learning, especially “far” transfer. Intended transfer of learning from an intervention is an intended increase in transfer outcomes attributed to the intervention in a randomised trial. To help assess potential far transfer of learning (far transfer effects) from an intervention intended to improve critical thinking about health choices—the Informed Health Choices (IHC) secondary school intervention—we are developing and evaluating (validating) questionnaire items (questions or tasks). In a separate, subsequent study, we will conduct a quantitative evaluation of the items. We will use the items developed in this study to measure outcomes in the 1-year-follow-up assessments of randomised trials of the IHC secondary school intervention in Kenya, Rwanda, and Uganda. In a separate, subsequent study, we will conduct a quantitative evaluation of the items.</p>
<p><strong>Objectives</strong></p>
<ol>
<li>Identify intended transfer of learning (intended transfer effects, or increases in transfer outcomes) caused by the IHC secondary school intervention, by developing a model</li>
<li>Prioritise potential outcomes included in the model for the 1-year-follow-up assessments of the trials of the intervention</li>
<li>Develop and evaluate questionnaire items for measuring potential effects included in the model, focusing on the prioritised outcomes</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>Methods</strong></p>
<p>The overarching steps of this study are 1) developing a model of potential transfer of learning from the intervention; 2) prioritising outcomes included in the model; 3) brainstorming and drafting questionnaire items; and 4) conducting a qualitative evaluation of the items. </p>
<p><strong>Results</strong></p>
<p>Results of the study will include:</p>
<ul>
<li>a model of intended transfer of learning (intended transfer effects, or increases in transfer outcomes) from the IHC secondary school intervention,</li>
<li>a set of outcomes included in the model prioritised for the trials of the intervention, and</li>
<li>measures of potential transfer of learning that have been qualitatively evaluated.</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Discussion</strong></p>
<p>An important limitation of the study is that any measure of skill developed will be intervention-inherent when used in the trials.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6976925
oai:zenodo.org:6976925
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6976924
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Assessing potential "far transfer" of learning: protocol for development and evaluation of questionnaire items [Version 1, awaiting peer review]
info:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaper
oai:zenodo.org:7695783
2023-03-09T11:19:11Z
openaire_data
user-informedhealthchoices
Chesire, Faith
Mugisha, Michael
Ssenyonga, Ronald
Oxman, Matt
Ochieng, Marlyn
Simbi, Clarisse Marie Claudine
Nakyejwe, Esther
Ngatia, Benson
Muggaga, Solomon Kevin
Rosenbaum, Sarah
2023-03-03
<p>A qualitative dataset for the article: Teaching critical thinking about health information and choices in secondary schools: human-centred design of digital resources</p>
<p>We collected this data in Phase 2 of the work described in the article, to inform development of educational resources (<em>Be Smart About Your Health</em>) to support teaching critical thinking about health claims and making informed health choices for use in secondary schools, based on a set of Informed Health Choices Key Concepts. </p>
<p>Data collection methods: individual and group interviews, observation of classroom pilots, in Kenya, Rwanda, and Uganda, and via email from an international advisory group. Timeframe for data collection and analysis: 2020-2022</p>
<p>This dataset is a part of the research project: <em>Enabling sustainable public engagement in improving health and health equity, </em>2019-2024. Funded by GLOBVAC programme, Research Council of Norway. </p>
<p> </p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7695783
oai:zenodo.org:7695783
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7695782
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
critical health literacy
informed health choices
human centred design
informed decision making
Dataset for "Teaching critical thinking about health information and choices in secondary schools: human-centred design of digital resources"
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
oai:zenodo.org:6611932
2022-06-04T13:50:49Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Andrew D.
Chalmers, Iain
Dahlgren, Astrid
2022-06-03
<p>There are endless claims about treatments in the mass media, advertisements, and everyday personal communication. Some are true and some are false. Many are unsubstantiated: we do not know whether they are true or false. Unsubstantiated claims about the effects of treatments often turn out to be wrong. Consequently, people who believe and act on these claims suffer unnecessarily and waste resources by doing things that do not help and might be harmful, and by not doing things that do help.</p>
<p>In response to these challenges, we developed the Informed Health Choices Key Concepts as the first step in the Informed Health Choices (IHC) project, an initiative supported by the Research Council of Norway. The aim of the IHC project and ongoing work by the IHC Network is to help people make informed health choices.</p>
<p>In this document, we use the term “treatment” to include any intervention (action) intended to improve health, including preventive, therapeutic and rehabilitative interventions, and public health or health system interventions. Although we have developed and framed the Key Concepts to address treatment claims, people in other disciplines may find them relevant; for example, for assessing claims about the effects of educational interventions or environmental measures.</p>
<p>The Informed Health Choices (IHC) Key Concepts serve as the basis for developing learning resources to help people understand and apply the concepts when claims about the effects of treatments (and other interventions) are made, and when they make health choices. They are also the basis for an item bank of multiple-choice questions (the Claim Evaluation Tools item bank) that can be used for assessing people’s ability to apply the IHC Key Concepts.</p>
<p>The concepts are principles for evaluating the trustworthiness of treatment claims, comparisons, and choices. The concepts can help people to:</p>
<ol>
<li>Recognise when a claim about the effects of treatments has an untrustworthy basis</li>
<li>Recognise when evidence from comparisons of treatments is trustworthy and when it is not</li>
<li>Make well-informed choices about treatments</li>
</ol>
<p>They can help anyone, not just researchers, to think critically about whether to believe a treatment claim and what to do. This is sometimes referred to as critical health literacy. The Key Concepts are intended for people using research, not for doing research.</p>
<p>In this update, we started with the explanations and implications from the 2019 version of the IHC Key Concepts. For each concept, we have provided one or more examples to illustrate each explanation, and the basis for each concept, drawing on relevant research that informed the development of the IHC Key Concepts.</p>
<p>We have received only a few suggestions since the 2019 version was published and did not publish a new version of the Key Concepts in 2020 or 2021. We have decided that the version presented here will be the last revision made by us. This does not mean that this list of concepts cannot be further improved, but we will leave any further development of the IHC Key Concepts to others.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6611932
oai:zenodo.org:6611932
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6611931
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
concepts, critical thinking, critical appraisal, critical health literacy, causal inference, treatment claims, informed decision making, epistemology
Key Concepts for assessing claims about treatment effects and making well-informed treatment choices (Version 2022)
info:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaper
oai:zenodo.org:4765562
2021-05-16T13:48:08Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Moberg, Jenny
Treweek, Shaun
Rada, Gabriel
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Morelli, Angela
Alonso-Coello, Pablo
Glenton, Claire
Lewin, Simon
Odgaard-Jensen, Jan
Oxman, Andrew D
2017-02-17
<p>The primary objectives of this trial are to evaluate the following: the effects of interactive Summary of Findings (iSoF) tables compared to evidence‐based patient information, and to static SoF tables on participants’ understanding of, and satisfaction with, information about the benefits and harms of treatments when making a decision; the effects of the initial iSoF table presentation on understanding of, and satisfaction with, information about the benefits and harms of treatments when making a decision; and which presentation participants prefer.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4765562
oai:zenodo.org:4765562
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4765561
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Does an interactive Summary of Findings table improve users' understanding of and satisfaction with information about the benefits and harms of treatments? Protocol for a randomized trial.
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4696260
2021-05-15T15:17:34Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Matt
2021-04-16
<p>Supplementary files and tables for "Quality of information in news media reports about the effects of health interventions:<br>
Systematic review and meta-analyses"</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4696260
oai:zenodo.org:4696260
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4696259
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Quality of news reports about the effects of health interventions - Supporting Information
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
oai:zenodo.org:4748242
2021-05-12T13:48:13Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Matt
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Nsangi, Allen
Semakula, Daniel
Morelli, Angela
Austvoll-Dahlgren, Astrid
Oxman, Andrew D.
Sewankambo, Nelson K.
Kaseje, Margaret
Nyirazinyoye, Laetitia
Glenton, Claire
Lewin, Simon
2016-03-01
<p>This textbook for primary school children (10 to 12 year olds) includes a comic story that introduces and explains 12 Key Concepts, instructions for classroom activities, exercises, a list of key messages, and a glossary.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748242
oai:zenodo.org:4748242
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748241
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
The Health Choices Book: Learning to think carefully about treatments. A health science book for primary school children
info:eu-repo/semantics/book
oai:zenodo.org:4749079
2021-05-12T13:48:14Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Semakula, Daniel
2020-12-02
<p>This work was implemented under four main objectives. The first was to develop a mass media intervention to improve the ability of parents of primary school children in Uganda to critically appraise the trustworthiness of claims about the effects of treatments. The second and third were to evaluate the effects of this intervention immediately and a year after implementation, respectively. The last one was to investigate factors that might influence the impact, implementation and scaling up of the intervention, and any other effects.</p>
Daniel Semakula defended this thesis for the degree of PhD (Philosophiae Doctor) December 2, 2020 at Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4749079
oai:zenodo.org:4749079
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4749078
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Improving critical thinking about treatment claims, evidence and choices. Development and evaluation of an intervention to improve the ability of parents of primary school children in Uganda to critically appraise the trustworthiness of claims about treatment effects and make informed health choices
info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis
oai:zenodo.org:4748446
2021-05-12T13:48:12Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Oxman, Matt
Oxman, Andrew D.
Chelagat, Faith
Mugisha, Michael
Ssenyonga, Ronald
Nsangi, Allen
Semakula, Daniel
2019-12-01
<p>The objective of this research is to develop a set of accessible digital learning resources that are experienced as useful, usable, understandable, credible, desirable, and well-suited for use by secondary school students and teachers in Uganda, Kenya and Rwanda.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748446
oai:zenodo.org:4748446
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748445
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Human-centred design development of Informed Health Choices (IHC) learning resources for secondary school students: Protocol
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4781182
2022-08-09T13:00:45Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Matt
2021-05-22
<p>Supplementary files and tables for Quality of information in news media reports about the effects of health interventions: Systematic review and meta-analyses. F1000Research 2021, 10:433 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.52894.1)</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>PRISMA checklist.</strong></li>
<li><strong>S1 File. Protocol. </strong>“Quality of news media reports about the effects and costs of health interventions: Systematic review protocol”.</li>
<li><strong>S2 File. Protocol Appendix 1. </strong>“Appendix 1: Reference list of potentially eligible studies”.</li>
<li><strong>S3 File. Protocol Appendix 2.</strong> “Appendix 2: Description of search for an existing review”.</li>
<li><strong>S4 File. Dissertation.</strong> “Criteria used to measure the quality of news media reports about the effects of health interventions: Systematic review”.</li>
<li><strong>S5 File. Detailed search strategy.</strong></li>
<li><strong>S6 File. Informed Health Choices Key Concepts. </strong>2019 version.</li>
<li><strong>S7 File. Detailed information about deviations from the protocol.</strong></li>
<li><strong>S8 File. Forest plots for individual criteria groups.</strong></li>
<li><strong>S9 File. Individual risk of bias assessments.</strong></li>
<li><strong>S10 File. Individual criteria included in meta-analyses. </strong>Sample characteristics, verbatim and reworded criteria, related IHC Key Concepts, overall risk of bias, estimates and confidence intervals, and sample sizes.</li>
<li><strong>S1 Table. Included studies.</strong> References for all studies included in qualitative summary and reason for exclusion from meta-analyses or number of criteria included in meta-analyses.</li>
<li><strong>S2 Table. Sample characteristics and tools by study.</strong> Sample size, medium/media, country/countries, time period(s), intervention category/categories, and tool(s).</li>
<li><strong>S3 Table. Objectives of included studies.</strong></li>
<li><strong>S4 Table. Sampling frames and methods.</strong></li>
<li><strong>S5 Table. Reported subgroup analyses.</strong></li>
<li><strong>S6 Table. Number of quality criteria included in the meta-analysis per relevant IHC Key Concept.</strong></li>
</ul>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4781182
oai:zenodo.org:4781182
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4781181
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Quality of news reports about the effects of health interventions - Supporting Information
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
oai:zenodo.org:4748281
2021-05-12T13:48:13Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Lund, Hanna Marie
Mathisen, Per Erlend
Rekkavik, Marte Evensen
Voll, Enok
2018-11-22
<p>The purpose of this study was to explore in Norwegian primary and secondary schools: the demand for learning resources for teaching students to think criti-cally about health claims and choices; where teaching these skills best fits in the curriculum; and market conditions for introducing this into schools, including the availability of time, who the decision-makers are, and what influences their decisions.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748281
oai:zenodo.org:4748281
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748280
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Teaching critical thinking about health claims: market analysis for Norwegian primary and lower secondary school
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:7928674
2023-05-12T10:28:54Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Aronson JK et al
2023-05-12
<p><strong>About this cross-field framework</strong></p>
<p>In late 2018, Iain Chalmers, Andy Oxman, and others from the Informed Health Choices team convened a cross-field forum to develop a generic framework of key concepts for thinking critically about claims, research and choices about interventions, with the aim of supporting ‘informed choices’. An alliance of 24 researchers from across fields to develop the Key Concepts for Informed Choices framework. See the <a href="https://media.nature.com/original/magazine-assets/d41586-019-02407-9/d41586-019-02407-9.pdf">article in Nature</a> where this framework first appeared.</p>
<p><em>See also:</em></p>
<p>- <a href="https://uclpress.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.14324/RFA.06.1.05">article describing how the framework was developed</a> (with insight into the process and lessons for others who may be involved in similar cross-field initiatives)</p>
<p>- <a href="http://www.informedhealthchoices.org">www.informedhealthchoices.org</a> for more information about the Informed Health Choices network.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7928674
oai:zenodo.org:7928674
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7928673
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
informed choice
critical thinking
key concepts
framework
Key Concepts for Informed Choices - a generic cross-field framework
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
oai:zenodo.org:7681365
2023-03-01T02:26:55Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Matt
Oxman, Andrew D.
Fretheim, Atle
Lewin, Simon
2023-02-27
<p><strong>Introduction</strong><br>
To help students think critically about health information and decisions, we developed the Informed Health Choices (IHC) secondary school intervention. We are evaluating the intervention in cluster-randomised trials, and linked process evaluations, in Kenya, Rwanda, and Uganda. The study planned herein is a qualitative evidence synthesis (QES), using data about experiences and views of adverse effects from all three process evaluations. The QES overlaps with the process evaluations. The QES will allow us to comprehensively explore, report, and discuss experiences and views of potential adverse effects, and potential mechanisms. The findings are intended to help inform decisions about whether or how to redevelop, re-evaluate, or implement the intervention. The methods and findings might also be helpful to developing, evaluating, or implementing other educational interventions—especially interventions intended to improve critical thinking, within health or other fields.</p>
<p><strong>Objective</strong><br>
Explore participants’ and investigators’ experiences and views of potential adverse effects of the IHC secondary school intervention, and potential mechanisms of those effects.</p>
<p><strong>Methods</strong><br>
An independent researcher will assess methodological limitations of the included studies, based on a list of domains used by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) group. We will merge and modify framework analysis as outlined by Ritchie and Spencer, framework synthesis as described by Barnett-Page et al., and “best fit” framework synthesis as outlined by Carrol et al. All three are pragmatic approaches with a deductive analysis using an a priori framework, followed by an inductive thematic analysis. We will note possible differences in how participants generally conceptualise adverse effects of educational interventions, compared to the study team, and possible differences in adverse effects across trial settings, for the purposes of future research. To assess confidence in the synthesis findings, we will apply the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual) approach, using the interactive Summary of Qualitative Findings (iSoQ) tool. We will produce a Qualitative Evidence Profile, and Summary of Qualitative Findings Tables.</p>
<p><strong>Discussion</strong><br>
The QES and the process evaluations overlapping and being part of the same project has methodological implications that amount to both strengths and limitations. Like in prospective meta-analyses, when planning the process evaluations, we harmonised the objectives, facilitating synthesis, while investigators in each setting still had autonomy to explore phenomena specifically for their study. Like individual patient data (IDP) meta-analyses, this study will be based on data from the process evaluations, facilitating more reliable analysis and synthesis than if it was only based on reported findings. As far as we are aware, this QES will be the first of its kind methodologically, and first empirical study of its size and rigour focusing on potential adverse effects of an educational intervention. The QES and process evaluations overlapping and being part of the same project also introduces risk of bias. Another challenge is that we are including the study team’s experiences and views. In general, to address these challenges, we will be transparent, and apply reflexivity throughout.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7681365
oai:zenodo.org:7681365
eng
Zenodo
https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/CN4M7
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7681364
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
adverse effects
harms
side effects
unintended effects
unanticipated effects
unexpected effects
education
students
pupils
learners
secondary school students
high school students
young people
youth
adolescents
school
secondary school
high school
educational interventions
public health interventions
teaching resources
learning resources
educational resources
secondary school resources
high school resources
critical thinking
critical appraisal
health literacy
critical health literacy
evidence-based healthcare
evidence-based medicine
health
public health
low-income countries
LICs
low and middle-income countries
LMICs
developing countries
qualitative evidence synthesis
QES
framework analysis
framework synthesis
"best fit" framework synthesis
Participants' and investigators' experiences and views of potential adverse effects of an educational intervention: Protocol for a qualitative evidence synthesis
info:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaper
oai:zenodo.org:6560218
2022-05-18T13:51:14Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Ssenyonga, Ronald
Oxman, Andrew D.
Nakyejwe, Esther
Mugagga, Solomon K.
Nsangi, Allen
Semakula, Daniel
Chesire, Faith
Mugisha, Michael
Lewin, Simon
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Oxman, Matt
Kaseje, Margaret
Sewankambo, Nelson K.
2022-05-18
<p>Background</p>
<p>To make well-informed choices, people must possess skills to assess the trustworthiness of health-related claims. It is important that young people learn to assess the reliability of claims to inform decisions, both when making their own choices and as citizens participating in a democracy. This trial aims to evaluate the effect of the Informed Health Choices (IHC) teaching resources on secondary school students’ ability to assess health-related claims and make informed choices.</p>
<p>Methods</p>
<p>This will be a two-arm cluster-randomised trial. We will randomise 80 lower secondary schools to evaluate the IHC secondary school digital teaching resources. The resources for teachers include 10 lessons to be delivered in a single school term, using lesson plans developed for classrooms equipped with only a blackboard or with a projector. Teachers in the intervention arm will be invited to a three-day teacher training workshop. Teachers in the control schools will continue teaching the national curriculum. Uganda’s National Curriculum Development Centre introduced a new competence-based curriculum in 2020. This curriculum has critical thinking as one of seven generic skills to be taught across all subjects. The curriculum does not explicitly include critical thinking about health. The IHC lessons address nine prioritised key concepts. We will use multiple choice questions – two for each key concept - to evaluate the student’s ability to assess claims and make informed choices. We will measure the proportion of students with a passing score at the end of the school term, and again after one year to assess retention of what was learned.</p>
<p>Expected results</p>
<p>Based on previous work done in Ugandan primary schools, we anticipate that the use of the teaching resources will lead to a large improvement in the lower secondary school students’ ability to assess claims and make informed health choices.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6560218
oai:zenodo.org:6560218
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6560217
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
critical thinking
health literacy
education
secondary school
randomized trial
adolescents
Uganda
Does the use of the Informed Health Choices teaching resources improve the secondary students' ability to critically think about health in Uganda? A cluster randomised trial protocol
info:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaper
oai:zenodo.org:4746625
2021-05-10T18:36:28Z
user-informedhealthchoices
The Informed Health Choices Group
2020-03-01
<p>A summary of the development, evaluation and adaptation of IHC resources across more than 20 countries from the last year.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4746625
oai:zenodo.org:4746625
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4746624
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Informed Health Choices Newsletter 2020
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
oai:zenodo.org:4746641
2021-05-11T01:48:10Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Andrew David
Chalmers, Iain
Dahlgren, Astrid
The Informed Health Choices group
2019-12-11
<p>The Informed Health Choices (IHC) Key Concepts serve as the basis for developing learning resources to help people understand and apply the concepts when claims about the effects of treatments (and other interventions) are made, and when they make health choices. They are also the basis for an item bank of multiple-choice questions (the Claim Evaluation Tools item bank) that can be used for assessing people’s ability to apply the IHC Key Concepts.</p>
<p>The concepts are principles for evaluating the trustworthiness of treatment claims, comparisons, and choices. The concepts can help people to recognise when a claim about the effects of treatments has an untrustworthy basis, recognise when evidence from comparisons of treatments is trustworthy and when it is not, and make well-informed choices about treatments.</p>
<p>They can help anyone, not just researchers, to think critically about whether to believe a treatment claim and what to do. This is sometimes referred to as critical health literacy. We have not included concepts that are only relevant for researchers or that require a research background. The Key Concepts are intended for people using research, not for doing research.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4746641
oai:zenodo.org:4746641
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4746640
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Key Concepts for assessing claims about treatment effects and making well-informed treatment choices
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4748348
2021-05-12T13:48:11Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Martinez, Laura
The Informed Health Choices Group
2019-02-18
<p>Results from pilots of the IHC primary school resources in other settings (both in Africa and Europe) give us reason to believe that teachers and children in many countries will find the Informed Health Choices primary school resources acceptable and understandable, with language translation and minor adaptations, such as the inclusion of some text examples or activities that are familiar in their setting. We produced this guide to support groups of people who want to carry out language translations and minor adaptations.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748348
oai:zenodo.org:4748348
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748347
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Guide for translating the Informed Health Choices school resources
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:6919372
2022-07-28T13:48:59Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Chesire, Faith
Kaseje, Margaret
Ochieng, Marlyn
Mugisha, Michael
Ssenyonga, Ronald
Oxman, Matt
Nsangi, Allen
Semakula, Daniel
Nyirazinyoye, Laetitia
Dahlgren, Astrid
Sewankambo, Nelson K.
Oxman, Andrew D.
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Lewin, Simon
2022-07-28
<p><strong>Background</strong>: People frequently make decisions about what can improve their health. They do this based on large amounts of information that they get from different sources, which include claims about what harms or improves health. People therefore need skills to assess the trustworthiness of health claims. The Informed Health Choices (IHC) Key Concepts framework was used to develop the ‘Be Smart about your Health’ secondary school resources to help students in lower secondary to assess health claims about the effects of treatments. We are evaluating these resources in a cluster randomized trial in 80 lower secondary schools in Kenya. This protocol is for a process evaluation that will be conducted alongside the trial. The objective of this evaluation is to explore the extent to which the intervention was delivered as planned; understand factors that facilitated or hindered the delivery and impact of the resources; and antici-pated and unanticipated effects.</p>
<p><br>
<strong>Study design</strong>: We will employ a mixed-methods design using quantitative and qualita-tive data. We will collect quantitative data from all schools (n=40) allocated to the in-tervention arm using lesson evaluation forms. Our qualitative data collection will in-clude: (a) structured classroom observations in all schools (n=40), with at least one lesson observed in each school. In a sample of eight schools, we shall observe more than one lesson. (b) We will conduct focus group discussions (with students (n=4), teachers (n=1) and parents (n=4). (c) Key informant interviews with policymakers in education (n=5), teachers (n=8), and with school principals (n=8)). We will purposively select these schools based on location (urban and rural) and ownership (private and public).</p>
<p><br>
<strong>Data analysis</strong>: We will use framework analysis to analyze qualitative data and descrip-tive analysis to analyze quantitative data. We will summarize and appraise the confi-dence of the key findings from the qualitative data using a modified version of the GRADE-CERQual approach.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6919372
oai:zenodo.org:6919372
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6919371
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
critical thinking, critical health literacy, secondary school curriculum, adolescents, treatment claims, health information, process evaluation, Kenya
Effect of the Informed Health Choices digital secondary school resources on the ability of lower secondary students in Kenya to critically appraise health claims: protocol for a process evaluation
info:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaper
oai:zenodo.org:4748399
2021-05-12T13:48:11Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Andrew D.
Dahlgren, Astrid
Martinez Garcia, Laura
Kaseje, Margaret
Nsangi, Allen
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Semakula, Daniel
Sewankambo, Nelson K.
2019-12-01
<p>An overview of what is known from systematic reviews of the effects of teaching strategies can inform the design of learning resources and decisions about which teaching strategies to use. We are undertaking this overview to inform decisions about which teaching strategies to use to teach critical thinking to primary and secondary school students.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748399
oai:zenodo.org:4748399
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748398
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
The effects of teaching strategies on learning to think critically in primary and secondary schools: protocol for an overview of systematic reviews
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:6874985
2022-07-22T01:48:50Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Mugisha, M
Nyirazinyoye, L
Oxman, AD
Simbi, CMC
Chesire, F
Ssenyonga, R
Oxman, M
Nsangi, A
Semakula, D
Dahlgren, A
Kaseje, M
Sewankambo, NK
Rosenbaum, S
Lewin, S
2022-07-21
<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Informed Health Choices (IHC) network is a group of researchers aiming to develop the public’s critical thinking skills and help them make informed health choices. We started with young people and developed the primary and secondary school resources for teaching critical thinking about health choices. The “<em>Be Smart about your Health</em>” secondary school resources are designed for lower secondary students and will be evaluated in randomized trials in three countries: Kenya, Rwanda, and Uganda. This protocol is for a process evaluation that will be conducted alongside the trial in Rwanda. The aim is to assess the implementation process, impacts of the intervention, and factors affecting the impacts and scaling up use of the resources.</p>
<p><strong>Methods: </strong>We will follow the UK Medical Research Council’s guidance for designing process evaluations of complex interventions alongside randomized trials. We will use quantitative and qualitative methods. We will collect quantitative data to assess lessons taught (dose), students’ attendance (reach) and any alterations in how the intervention (adaptation) is delivered in all schools allocated to the intervention arm (n=42). We will explore the intended and unintended effects, and transfer of learning through focus group discussions (FGDs) with students (n=8-10 FGDs), their parents/guardians (n=5 FGDs) and their teachers using key informant interviews (KIIs) (n=8-10 KIIs). We will also explore factors affecting the effective delivery and scaling up of the intervention through interviews with teachers (n=8-10 KIIs), school administrators (n=8-10 KIIs), district authorities (n=5 KII) and policymakers in education (n=5 KIIs). We will collect qualitative data in about 8-10 schools varying by district, school ownership, and school performance. We will analyse quantitative data using descriptive statics and qualitative data using thematic content analysis and framework analysis.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6874985
oai:zenodo.org:6874985
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6874984
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
critical thinking, process evaluation, adolescents, treatment claims, health literacy, Rwanda
Use of the Informed Health Choices digital resources for teaching lower secondary school students in Rwanda to think critically about health: protocol for a process evaluation
info:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaper
oai:zenodo.org:7509942
2023-01-06T14:26:52Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Balardin, Joana
Antunes, Jade Nascimento
2023-01-06
<p>The Brazilian Portuguese translation process followed the basic steps adopted during the Spanish translation. It included minor adaptations to the context and changing the names of the characters, as well as minor modifications to some of the drawings when required by local regulations. It did not include modifications to the text content.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7509942
oai:zenodo.org:7509942
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7509941
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Informed Health Choices primary school resources – Brazilian Portuguese translation process
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:4765566
2021-05-16T13:48:08Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Semakula, Daniel
Nsangi, Allen
Glenton, Claire
Lewin, Simon
Kaseje, Margaret
Oxman, Andrew D
Oxman, Matt
Rosenbaum, Sarah
Austvoll-Dahlgren, Astrid
Chalmers, Iain
Fretheim, Atle
Sewankambo, Nelson K
2017-01-10
<p>This protocol is for a process evaluation to assess the fidelity of the Informed Health Choices (IHC) podcast; and to explore why the podcast did or did not have the intended effects, ways to scale up use of the podcast, and potential beneficial and adverse effects not measured in the trial.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4765566
oai:zenodo.org:4765566
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4765565
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
An educational podcast to improve the ability of parents of primary school children in Uganda to assess claims about treatment effects: Process evaluation protocol
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:10034017
2023-10-23T12:58:45Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Austvoll-Dahlgren, Astrid
Oxman, Andrew D.
Chalmers, Iain
2019-11-09
<p>This manual describes the rationale and use of the Claim Evaluation Tools and will guide you in preparing a test or questionnaire for your purposes, whether you are a teacher or a researcher. The items were developed as part of the Informed Health Choices project, and can be used for creating tests to be used in school and other learning settings, as outcome measures in evaluations of educational interventions, or in surveys to map abilities in a population.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10034017
oai:zenodo.org:10034017
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4748378
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Manual for preparing a test or questionnaire based on the Claim Evaluation Tools database
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
oai:zenodo.org:6640824
2022-07-17T07:33:41Z
openaire_data
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Andrew D.
Chalmers, Iain
Dahlgren, Astrid
2022-06-14
<p>Suggestions for improvements to the 2018 and 2019 versions of the Informed Health Choices Key Concepts and responses.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6640824
oai:zenodo.org:6640824
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6640823
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
concepts, critical thinking, critical appraisal, causal inference, critical health literacy, treatment claims, informed decision making, epistemology
Additional file 1. Suggestions for changes to IHC Key Concepts and responses
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
oai:zenodo.org:6849090
2022-07-17T13:48:44Z
openaire_data
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Andrew D.
Chalmers, Iain
Dahlgren, Astrid
2022-06-14
<p>Suggestions for improvements to the 2018 and 2019 versions of the Informed Health Choices Key Concepts and responses.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6849090
oai:zenodo.org:6849090
eng
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6640823
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
concepts, critical thinking, critical appraisal, causal inference, critical health literacy, treatment claims, informed decision making, epistemology
Suggestions for changes to the IHC key concepts 2018 - 2022
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
oai:zenodo.org:6597493
2023-06-12T08:53:36Z
user-informedhealthchoices
Oxman, Andrew D.
Mugisha, Michael
Chesire, Faith
Ssenyonga, Ronald
Rose, Christopher J.
Nsangi, Allen
Kaseje, Margaret
Sewankambo, Nelson K.
Dahlgren, Astrid
Lewin, Simon
Moberg, Jenny
Rosenbaum, Sarah
2022-05-31
<p><strong>Background</strong>: Many people find it difficult to make decisions about what to believe or do regarding “health actions” (things that they can do to care for their health or the health of others). To avoid being misled by unreliable information and to make good choices, people must be able to understand and apply some basic principles (concepts). The Informed Health Choices (IHC) secondary school resources are designed to help students learn and use nine of these concepts. This is a protocol for a prospective meta-analysis of three cluster-randomized trials in Kenya, Rwanda, and Uganda.</p>
<p><strong>Objective</strong>: To estimate the effect of using the IHC secondary school resources in addition to the standard curriculum compared to the standard curriculum in the context where the trial is conducted) on students’ ability to think critically about health actions.</p>
<p><strong>Methods</strong>: The participants are lower secondary school students (age 14-16) and their teachers. The intervention is a 2-3-day teacher training workshop, a teachers’ guide, and 10 40-minute lessons taught to the students during a single school term. The comparison is the standard curriculum in each country. The primary outcome measure is the Critical Thinking about Health (CTH) Test. The test is a measure of an individual’s ability to understand and apply the nine key critical thinking concepts included in the lessons. It includes two multiple-choice questions for each concept. The primary outcome is the proportion of students with a passing score on the test. Secondary outcomes include the average score on the test, the proportion of students with a score that indicates mastery of the nine concepts, retention of what the students learned after one year, self-efficacy, intended behaviours, performance on standard, end-of-term examinations, and teachers’ ability to understand and apply the nine concepts measured using the CTH Test. Overall effects will be estimated using inverse variance methods. We will use mixed effects models with individual student data to estimate variation in effects for the primary and first two secondary outcomes in relation to three potential effect modifiers: use of a projector version compared to a blackboard version of the lessons, class size, and student performance on end-of-term examinations prior to the intervention.</p>
<p><strong>Strengths and limitations</strong>: Strengths of this meta-analysis are that it is prospective, allowing for collaboration on the design of the trials and certainty that all eligible trials have been included. A limitation is that the review authors are both developing and evaluating the intervention, although there are efforts to minimise bias.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6597493
oai:zenodo.org:6597493
Zenodo
https://zenodo.org/communities/informedhealthchoices
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6597492
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
critical thinking, health literacy, education, secondary school, systematic review, individual participant-level data meta-analysis
Effects of using the Informed Health Choices secondary school resources: protocol for a prospective meta-analysis
info:eu-repo/semantics/workingPaper