IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0239985.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Protocol for assessing stakeholder engagement in the development and evaluation of the Informed Health Choices resources teaching secondary school students to think critically about health claims and choices

Author

Listed:
  • Allen Nsangi
  • Andrew David Oxman
  • Matt Oxman
  • Sarah E Rosenbaum
  • Daniel Semakula
  • Ronald Ssenyonga
  • Michael Mugisha
  • Faith Chelagat
  • Margaret Kaseje
  • Leaticia Nyirazinyoye
  • Iain Chalmers
  • Nelson Kaulukusi Sewankambo

Abstract

Background: As part of a five year plan (2019–2023), the Informed Health Choices Project, is developing and evaluating resources for helping secondary school students learn to think critically about health claims and choices. We will bring together key stakeholders; such as secondary school teachers and students, our main target for the IHC secondary school resources, school administrators, policy makers, curriculum development specialists and parents, to enable us gain insight about the context. Objectives: To ensure that stakeholders are effectively and appropriately engaged in the design, evaluation and dissemination of the learning resources.To evaluate the extent to which stakeholders were successfully engaged. Methods: Using a multi-stage stratified sampling method, we will identify a representative sample of secondary schools with varied characteristics that might modify the effects of the learning resources such as, the school location (rural, semi-urban or urban), ownership (private, public) and ICT facilities (under resourced, highly resourced). A sample of schools will be randomly selected from the schools in each stratum. We will aim to recruit a diverse sample of students and secondary school teachers from those schools. Other stakeholders will be purposively selected to ensure a diverse range of experience and expertise. Results: Together with the teacher and student networks and the advisory panels, we will establish measurable success criteria that reflect the objectives of engaging stakeholders at the start of the project and evaluate the extent to which those criteria were met at the end of the project. Conclusion: We aim for an increase in research uptake, improve quality and appropriateness of research results, accountability and social justice.

Suggested Citation

  • Allen Nsangi & Andrew David Oxman & Matt Oxman & Sarah E Rosenbaum & Daniel Semakula & Ronald Ssenyonga & Michael Mugisha & Faith Chelagat & Margaret Kaseje & Leaticia Nyirazinyoye & Iain Chalmers & N, 2020. "Protocol for assessing stakeholder engagement in the development and evaluation of the Informed Health Choices resources teaching secondary school students to think critically about health claims and ," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-15, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0239985
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239985
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0239985
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0239985&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0239985?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0239985. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.