Train the Trainer Course book - Cochrane Public Health Group

calculation?
Yes
Partially
No
(Q2) Is there a statistically significant difference
between groups?
Yes
No
Not reported
(Q3) Are the statistical methods appropriate?
Yes
No
Not reported
(Q4a) Indicate the unit of allocation
Community/Organisation/group/provider/client
(Q4b) Indicate the unit of analysis
Community/Organisation/group/provider/client
(Q4c) If 4a and 4b are different, was the cluster
analysis done?
Yes
No
Not applicable
(Q4) Is the analysis performed by intervention
allocation status (i.e. ITT) rather than the actual
intervention received?
Yes
No
Can’t tell
Intervention integrity
(Q1) What percentage of participants received
the allocated intervention or exposure of
interest?
80-100%
60-79%
Less than 60%
Not reported
Not applicable
(Q2) Was the consistency of the intervention
measured?
Yes
No
A power calculation indicated that with five
schools in each arm the study would have 80%
power to detect an underlying difference in
means of normally distributed outcome
measure of ≥1.8SD at the 5% significance level
and 65% power to detect a difference at 1.5SD.
This took into account the cluster randomisation
design.
BMI – no significant difference
Vegetable intake – 24-hour recall: weighted
mean difference of 0.3 (95% CI 0.2 to 0.4). No p
values reported. Higher intake of foods and
drinks high in sugar in overweight children in
the intervention group, and lower fruit intake in
obese children in the intervention group.
Same difference (0.3) for the overweight
children.
Three-day diary: No differences.
Physical activity: No differences.
Yes
School (institution)
Individual
Yes
Cluster analysis performed
Can’t tell – not reported.
80-100%
- Use process evaluation paper
Schools had a different number of activities that
they implemented (6 to 14 action plans per
school) – 89% of these action plans were
successfully achieved.
Yes – use process evaluation paper.
96