Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2015 Oct;30(5):731-41.
doi: 10.1093/her/cyv039. Epub 2015 Sep 4.

Tracking intervention delivery in the 'Tobacco-Free Teachers/Tobacco-Free Society' program, Bihar, India

P S Pawar  1 , E M Nagler  2 , P C Gupta  3 , A M Stoddard  4 , H A Lando  5 , L Shulman  2 , M S Pednekar  3 , V Kasisomayajula  2 , M B Aghi  3 , D N Sinha  6 , G S Sorensen  2
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Tracking intervention delivery in the 'Tobacco-Free Teachers/Tobacco-Free Society' program, Bihar, India

P S Pawar et al. Health Educ Res. 2015 Oct.

Abstract

In health education and behavior change interventions, process tracking monitors the delivery of an intervention and its receipt to the intended audience. A randomized controlled trial in the state of Bihar, India was conducted to help school teachers become tobacco free through appropriately designed intervention program and delivery system. We describe the results from process tracking of this intervention delivery. The intervention program was centred on six topics delivered in each school through 12 sessions over 6 successive months. The program deliverers recorded the process measures as total number of sessions and program-components implemented (fidelity); time spent conducting sessions (dose) and proportion of teachers attending at least one session (reach). The outcome measures (teachers' exposure to intervention messages and tobacco policy adoption) were assessed post-intervention. All 12 sessions were delivered in 33 out of 36 schools. Thirty-one schools implemented all six program components. In 18 schools, ≥95% of the teachers participated in one or more sessions. Thirty-three schools received 12 or more hours of dose. In 29 schools, 100% teachers reported exposure to all program messages. Tobacco policy was adopted by all schools. Thus, the intervention was generally delivered as planned and it had a positive impact on teachers and schools.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Steckler A, Linnan L. Process Evaluation for Public Health Interventions and Research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2002.
    1. Wendy G. Community-based interventions to promote non-smoking: a systematic review. Working Paper Series. ISBN: 1-901577-16-3. RUHBC, University of Edinburgh, December 2004. Available at: http://www.cphs.mvm.ed.ac.uk/aboutCPHS/history/wp_docs/WorkingPaper1.pdf Accessed: 8 March 2014.
    1. Saunders RP, Evans MH, Joshi P. Developing a process evaluation plan for assessing health promotion program implementation: a how-to guide. Health Promot Pract 2005; 6: 134–47. - PubMed
    1. Young DR, Steckler A, Cohen S, et al. Process evaluation results from a school- and community-linked intervention: the Trial of Activity for Adolescent Girls (TAAG). Health Educ Res 2008; 23: 976–86. First published on 16 June 2008, 10.1093/her/cyn029. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mathur MR, Singh N, Arora M. Tobacco use and cardiovascular diseases - Evidence, interventions and primary prevention. J Prevent Cardiol 2011; 1: 66–72.

Publication types