Skip to main content

Table 1 Phase 2 knowledge and engagement scores at the start and end of stakeholders’ intervention involvement

From: Development and testing of a novel survey to assess Stakeholder-driven Community Diffusion of childhood obesity prevention efforts

Constructs and domains

# items

Max. score

Shape Up Somerville (n = 13)

Romp & Chomp (n = 8)

Mean score (SD)

T2-T1 difference (95% CI)a

Mean score (SD)

T2-T1 difference

(95% CI)a

T1

T2

T1

T2

Knowledgeb

        

Composite

20

20

10.38 (5.16)

13.92 (3.78)

3.54 (0.35–6.72)*

10.13 (6.28)

13.63 (2.68)

3.50 (−0.42–7.42)

Domain-specific

        

1. Problem

4

4

3.23 (1.24)

3.77 (0.60)

0.54 (−0.23–1.30)

3.13 (1.36)

4.00 (0.00)

0.88 (−0.26–2.01)

2. Intervention factors

4

4

0.92 (2.06)

2.54 (1.45)

1.62 (0.50–2.73)*

1.50 (2.00)

1.88 (1.36)

0.38 (−0.96–1.71)

3. Roles

4

4

2.31 (1.93)

3.38 (1.26)

1.08 (−0.07–2.22)

1.63 (2.00)

3.38 (0.92)

1.75 (−0.13–3.63)

4. Sustainability

4

4

2.46 (1.39)

2.46 (1.20)

0.00 (−0.55–0.55)

2.88 (1.25)

2.75 (1.39)

−0.13 (−1.07–0.82)

5. Resources

4

4

1.46 (1.74)

2.09 (1.83)d

0.73 (− 0.64–2.09)d

1.00 (1.25)

1.63 (0.79)

0.63 (0.00–1.25)*

Engagementc

        

Composite

50

25

17.89 (3.28)

18.98 (3.43)

1.09 (−0.55–2.73)

19.02 (2.11)

19.67 (1.52)

0.65 (−0.43–1.73)

Domain-specific

        

1. Dialogue & mutual learning

11

5

3.99 (0.75)

4.29 (0.54)

0.29 (−0.04–0.62)

3.93 (0.49)

3.98 (0.40)

0.05 (−0.13–0.22)

2. Flexibility

8

5

3.68 (0.71)

3.66 (1.16)

−0.02 (− 0.70–0.66)

3.89 (0.28)

3.94 (0.27)

0.05 (− 0.05–0.14)

3. Influence & power

4

5

3.12 (0.81)

3.42 (0.88)

0.31 (0.02–0.59)*

3.47 (0.67)

3.66 (0.50)

0.19 (−0.12–0.50)

4. Leadership & stewardship

22

5

3.60 (0.71)

3.84 (0.69)

0.23 (−0.12–0.58)

3.78 (0.44)

3.88 (0.36)

0.10 (−0.19–0.38)

5. Trust

5

5

3.78 (0.78)e

4.08 (0.81)e

0.30 (− 0.07–0.67)e

3.95 (0.67)

4.23 (0.46)

0.28 (−0.05–0.60)

  1. Notes: T1 and T2 are the start and end, respectively, of stakeholders’ intervention involvement. CI = confidence interval. *p < 0.05
  2. aPaired t-test
  3. bKnowledge items for domains 1–4 were multiple choice or true/false with the following scoring: − 1 = incorrect; 0 = not sure; 1 = correct. Items for domain 5 were on a 4-point agree/disagree Likert scale with the following scoring (to remain consistent with domains 1–4 scores): − 1 = strongly disagree; − 0.5 = disagree; 0.5 = agree; 1 = strongly agree
  4. cEngagement items were on a 5-point agree/disagree Likert scale. Data were weighted to reflect the number of items per domain to ease domain-to-domain comparisons. Composite scores are a mean of the total, not a sum of means; therefore, domain scores may not add up to composite score
  5. dn = 11; difference and 95% CI calculated from paired respondents
  6. en = 12