2017
DOI: 10.1017/s1368980017003639
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Using pre- and post-survey instruments in interventions: determining the random response benchmark and its implications for measuring effectiveness

Abstract: Knowing the percentage of individuals showing improvement on a pre/post survey instrument when questions are randomly answered is an important benchmark number to determine in order to draw valid inferences about nutrition interventions. The results presented here should help analysts in determining this benchmark number for some common survey structures and avoid drawing faulty inferences about the effectiveness of an intervention.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Used widely across academia, the pre-test/post-test design is useful because it permits researchers to determine to what extent a workshop, training session, or other intervention makes a difference in respondent answers. A positive change between the pre-and post-workshop answers indicates that the intervention was effective (Davis et al 2018). As Stratton (2019, 573) noted, "An advantage of a pre-test and …political scientists typically are not trained in how to disseminate their work to nonacademic audiences or to engage with policy practitioners.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Used widely across academia, the pre-test/post-test design is useful because it permits researchers to determine to what extent a workshop, training session, or other intervention makes a difference in respondent answers. A positive change between the pre-and post-workshop answers indicates that the intervention was effective (Davis et al 2018). As Stratton (2019, 573) noted, "An advantage of a pre-test and …political scientists typically are not trained in how to disseminate their work to nonacademic audiences or to engage with policy practitioners.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, no medical practitioners participated. Third, the theoretical likelihood of respondents demonstrating improvement between the pre-and post-test is high [27].…”
Section: Study Strengths and Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As the main intent of the intervention was to impact individuals as opposed to scores, an improved average or median score would not glean any information about the number of individuals who improved because of the IPE activity. Thus, the percentage of individuals showing improvement (positive change) from the pre-to the postsurvey was calculated for each survey item [16]. Likewise, the percentage of individuals showing a decline (negative change) from the pre-to the postsurvey was calculated for each survey item.…”
Section: Data Collection and Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%