Study On The Model Of Effect Evaluation In AIDS Health Education

With the development of health education, more and more people pay attention to the effect evaluation and the use of effect evaluation. The research and use of effect evaluation is the weaknesses in health education field. By reviewing literature, effect evaluation of health education is in great need of a uniform method and model. To explore the scientific and standardized effect evaluation models of health education, to improve the effect evaluation quality, to ensure the accuracy and applicability of effect evaluation, and to provide the basis for future health education, this study was carried out.Materials and MethodsThe stratified cluster sampling method was used during survey. Total 270 junior middle school students from six classes of two ordinary junior middle schools, which are located in a certain area of Hangzhou city, Zhejiang Province, with the similar quality of education and analogous campus culture, were included. As every three classes are similar in age and sex distribution in the same school, the objectives were randomized into three groups, intervention group A (with health education intervention, two questionnaire survey before and after intervention), intervention group B (with health education intervention, one questionnaire survey after intervention), and control group C (only with general hygienic knowledge education,two questionnaire surveys before and after intervention).Questionnaire design is based on the key points of AIDS health education, the " Questionnaire of AIDS Prevention Knowledge for Students" (World Health Organization), and the "Young Students Questionnaire" from Monitor Protocol and Questionnaire for Comprehensive National HIV Programme monitoring pilots (China CDC). According to the native students' characteristics, some inappropriate sensitive items were deleted. The questionnaire is mainly including general knowledge about AIDS, its infection way and prevention, and so on.Results1. Comparison of the comprehensive scores: The mean comprehensive scores were, 39.8±8.3 and 63.8 + 9.2 in intervention group A, and 39.3±6.9 and 39.5 + 7.6 in control group C before and after intervention, respectively. The mean comprehensive score in intervention group B after intervention was 56.0 + 8.4. The increase of mean comprehensive score after intervention in intervention group A was significant compared to that before intervention, however, which was not significant in control group C. The mean comprehensive score after intervention in intervention group A was significantly higher than that in intervention group B and control group C, respectively. And the same circumstance existed between intervention group B and control group C.2. Comparison of the knowing rate of specific items: The difference in the knowing rate for every specific item was not significantly different between intervention group A and control group C before intervention. In intervention group A, the knowing rates for mass-specific items were significantly increased before and after intervention. However, in control group C, the knowing rate for only one specific item was significantly increased before and after intervention. After intervention, the knowing rates of several specific items in intervention group A was significantly higher than those in intervention group B and control group C, respectively. And the same circumstance existed between intervention group B and control group C.ConclusionsThe AIDS knowledge level has markedly been improved after intervention in intervention group A, but not in control group C. It is suggested that AIDS health education is an effective method for students to understand more AIDS knowledge. After intervention, The comprehensive score and knowing rates of specific items in intervention group A with two surveys before and after intervention, respectively, was markedly higher than those in intervention group B with only one survey after intervention. It shows that the usage of the same questionnaire to the same group may result in overestimating the effect of health education, duplication survey will overestimate health education results. The repeat survey should be avoided to the same group to ensure the accuracy of effect evaluation.