257887 A creative method for designing a comparison group: Reducing cost and controlling confounding factors

Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Cheng Wang, MA , MS , Institute for Child Health Policy, Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, FL
Michelle A. Doldren, MPH EDD , Institute for Child Health Policy, Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, FL
Deborah A. Mulligan, MD FAAP FACEP , Institute for Child Health Policy, Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, FL
Minerva Bryant, MEd, CAP, CMHP , Vice President, Clinical Operations, River Region Human Services, Inc., Jacksonville, FL
  
Sister's Rise is a SAMHSA funded prevention project that seeks to reduce the incidence of HIV infection and prevent the use of substances among Black, heterosexual men and women ages 19-34 in Jacksonville, FL. The project delivers two evidence based intervention programs: SISTA and Prime for Life (PFL). SISTA focuses on HIV prevention and PFL focuses on Substance Abuse prevention. Both programs have similar delivery methods, such as the total number of sessions, session length, as well as data collection time points. To detect the effect of the substance abuse prevention program, comparison groups were developed from the concurrent SISTA program participants, who have not been exposed to PFL.

The PFL comparison group participants have a dual role 1) they are SISTA program participants, and 2) they also serve as PFL comparison group participants concurrently. When collecting the SISTA baseline questionnaires, the PFL baseline questionnaires are also collected from these participants. And the same thing holds true for both the exit and follow up questionnaires. Surveys collected from the PFL intervention groups and the comparison groups will be paired and analyzed to detect the change on participants' knowledge level for substance abuse, the intention for behavioral change and the behavioral change.

This comparison group design was chosen since both SISTA and PFL program delivery formats are similar between the intervention group and the comparison group. Thus, this comparison group design keeps confounding factors in control, while saving time and funding that are typically necessary for recruiting comparison group participants.

Learning Areas:
Conduct evaluation related to programs, research, and other areas of practice
Planning of health education strategies, interventions, and programs
Program planning
Public health or related research

Learning Objectives:
1.Explain the design of the PFL comparison group for the purpose of program evaluation 2.Demonstrate the cost effectiveness of the PFL comparison group design

Keywords: Evaluation, Cost-Effectiveness

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: Mrs. Cheng Wang, MSci, MA, has been the leading statistician and program evaluator for many public health projects finished by our Institute. In recently years, Mrs. Wang’s research interests are focused on public health issues, such as child injury prevention, HIV/AIDS prevention and the Health Care system in the United States. She is specialized in program planning, database management, statistical design and analysis. Mrs. Wang also teaches statistical courses at the college level.
Any relevant financial relationships? No

I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.

Back to: 4272.0: Evaluation in Practice