Not provided
| ID | Type | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| R01HD111699 | U.S. NIH Grant/Contract | View source |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) | NIH |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy of iCHAMPSS 2.0 in impacting Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance (RE-AIM) implementation outcomes, with implementation of a sexual health evidence-based program (EBP) assess iCHAMPSS 2.0's efficacy in impacting determinants of sexual health EBP implementation and to conduct a process evaluation to monitor iCHAMPSS 2.0 implementation, reach, dosage, and barriers and facilitators to implementing iCHAMPSS 2.0 during the study.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arm 1: 1 semester of implementation then 7 semesters of intervention | Experimental |
| |
| Arm 2: 1 semester of control, 1 semester of implementation then 7 semesters of intervention | Experimental |
| |
| Arm 3: 1 semesters of control, 1 semester of implementation then 6 semesters of intervention | Experimental |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| iCHAMPSS 2.0 | Behavioral | iCHAMPSS 2.0 is designed for Program Champions, critical to EBP use, such as district and school administrators, SHAC members (which include parents), and health and physical education teachers, who are highly motivated to promote sexual health education. iCHAMPSS 2.0 has four features:
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Change in percentage of schools within a district implementing an EBP | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) | |
| Rate of implementation of the EBP | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of School Health Advisory Councils (SHACs) that have recommended a sexual health EBP to their school board | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) | |
| Percentage of School Health Advisory Councils (SHACs) that have adopted a sexual health EBP to their school board |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Belinda Hernandez, PhD, MPH | Contact | (210) 276-9009 | Belinda.Hernandez@uth.tmc.edu | |
| Laura Thormaehlen | Contact | (713) 500-9000 | Laura.C.Thormaehlen@uth.tmc.edu |
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Belinda Hernandez, PhD, MPH | The University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston | Recruiting | Houston | Texas | 77030 | United States |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This is a stepwise cluster randomized control design study.There will be 3 clusters of school districts and each cluster will have five school districts with an average of five schools within each district.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Percentage of schools with the school board's approval of an Evidence Based Program (EBP) | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Percentage of schools with the principal's approval of an EBP | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Percentage of students receiving majority (over 50%) of a sexual health EBP | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Percentage of schools that have implemented the evidence-based program for more than one academic year as assessed by the implementation survey | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Change in perceived complexity as assessed by the staff survey | This is a 3 item questionnaire and each is scored form (1) Strongly disagree to (5) Strongly agree, maximum score of 15, higher score indicating worse outcome | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Change in compatibility as assessed by the staff survey | This is a 5 item questionnaire and each is scored from (1) Strongly disagree to (5) Strongly agree maximum score 25, higher score indicating better outcome | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Change in relative advantage as assessed by the staff survey | This is a 4 item questionnaire and each is scored from (1) Strongly disagree to (5) Strongly agree, maximum score of 20, higher score indicating better better outcome | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Change in perceived social systems support in parent community as assessed by the staff survey | This is a 8 item questionnaire and each is scored from (1) not at all supportive to (4) very supportive , maximum score of 32 , higher score indicating better outcome | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Change in presence of school policy as assessed by the staff survey | This is a 2 item questionnaire and each is scored from 1(strongly disagree) -5(strongly agree), maximum score 10, higher score indicating better outcome | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Change in adequate resources as assessed by the staff survey | This is a 5 item questionnaire and each is scored from 1(strongly disagree) -5(strongly agree), maximum score of 25, higher score indicating better outcome | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Change in presence of a program champion as assessed by the staff survey | This is a 4 item questionnaire and each is scored 1(strongly disagree) -5(strongly agree), maximum score 20, higher score indicating better outcome | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Change in implementation climate as assessed by the staff survey | This is a 6 item questionnaire and each is scored from 1(strongly disagree) -5(strongly agree), maximum score of 30, higher score indicating better outcome | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Change in inter organizational relationships as assessed by the staff survey | This is a 4 item questionnaire and each is scored from 1(strongly disagree) -5(strongly agree), maximum score 20, higher score indicating better outcome | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Change in intra organizational relationships as assessed by the staff survey | This is a 4 item questionnaire and each is scored from 1(strongly disagree) -5(strongly agree), maximum score 20, higher score indicating better outcome | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Change in perceived need as assessed by the staff survey | This is a 4 item questionnaire and each is scored from (1) Strongly disagree to (5) Strongly agree, maximum score range of 20, higher score indicating worse outcome | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Change in self-efficacy as assessed by the staff survey | This is a 19 item questionnaire and each is scored from 1(not at all confident)-4(very confident) , maximum score range of 76, higher score indicating better outcome | From baseline to end of intervention period (about 20 to 30 months from baseline) |
| Frequency of use of iCHAMPSS 2.0 as assessed by the website analytics | From baseline to end of school year (about 7 to 12 months from baseline) |
| Time spent using iCHAMPSS 2.0 as assessed by the district coordinator survey | This will be reported categorically as less than one hour, 1-2 hours, 3-4 hours, 5-6 hours and 7 hours or more | From baseline to end of school year (about 7 to 12 months from baseline) |
| Number of recurring users of iCHAMPSS 2.0 as assessed by the website analytics | From baseline to end of school year (about 7 to 12 months from baseline) |
| Number of unique users of iCHAMPSS 2.0 as assessed by the website analytics | From baseline to end of school year (about 7 to 12 months from baseline) |
| Mean number of users per school district of iCHAMPSS 2.0 as assessed by the website analytics | From baseline to end of school year (about 7 to 12 months from baseline) |
| Percentage of school districts/schools using iCHAMPSS 2.0 as assessed by the website analytics | From baseline to end of school year (about 7 to 12 months from baseline) |
| Percentage of iCHAMPSS 2.0 tools used in each step as assessed by the website analytics | From baseline to end of school year (about 7 to 12 months from baseline) |
| Perceived barriers to implementing iCHAMPSS 2.0 as assessed by the coordinator interviews and district coordinator surveys | This will be reported as a percentage | From baseline to end of school year (about 7 to 12 months from baseline) |
| Perceived facilitators to implementing iCHAMPSS 2.0 as assessed by the coordinator interviews and district coordinator surveys | This will be reported as a percentage | From baseline to end of school year (about 7 to 12 months from baseline) |