Skip to main content

Table 14 Self-reported behaviour: assessment of trustworthiness of treatment claims

From: Effects of the Informed Health Choices primary school intervention on the ability of children in Uganda to assess the reliability of claims about treatment effects, 1-year follow-up: a cluster-randomised trial

How sure are you that the treatment claim you heard is true or can be trusted?
 Control schools
N = 2844
Intervention schools
N = 3943
Missing49 (1.7%)60 (1.5%)
Not very sure because I don’t know the reason behind the claim665 (23.4%)1039 (26.4%)
Not very sure because the reason behind the claim was not good543 (19.1%)1087 (27.6%)
Very sure because the reason behind the claim was good704 (24.8%)790 (20.0%)
I don’t know because I don’t know how to decide whether it is true or not883 (31.0%)967 (24.5%)
Very sure or I don’t know1587 (55.8%)1757 (44.6%)
Odds ratio (very sure or I don’t know vs other)0.55
(95% CI, 0.45–0.67)
P < 0.0001
Adjusted differencea−15.0%
(95% CI, − 9.9% to − 19.7%)
Odds ratio (consistent with what they identified as the basis for the claim)b1.45
(95% CI, 1.18–1.75)
P = 0.000549
Adjusted differencea7.6%
(95% CI 3.5% - 11.1%)
  1. aThe differences are adjusted differences, based on mixed models with a random effects term for the clusters and the stratification variables modelled as fixed effects, using logistic regression. The odds ratio from the logistic regression has been converted to a difference using the intervention schools as the reference and the inverse of the odds ratios shown here
  2. bSee Table 5