Skip to main content

Table 4 Summary of behavioural outcomes

From: Effectiveness of digital interventions to improve household and community infection prevention and control behaviours and to reduce incidence of respiratory and/or gastro-intestinal infections: a rapid systematic review

Study Measure Outcome in Control Group Outcome in Intervention Group Statistical significance (p)
Bourgeois 2008 [16] Likelihood of staying home during an infectious respiratory illness during the study 39% (16/41) 14% (5/35) p = .02
Self-reported hand hygiene:
 Q1.a. (content of question not reported) 93% (40/43) 89% (50/56) OR = 0.9 (0.2–4.4), p = .88
 Q1.b. (content of question not reported) 81% (35/43) 84% (47/56) OR = 1.2 (0.4–3.8), p = .75
 Q1.c. (content of question not reported) 86% (37/43) 86% (48/ 56) OR = 1.9 (0.5–7.6), p = .36
Self-reported cough etiquette:
 Q2.a. (content of question not reported) 72% (31/43) 68% (38/56) OR = 0.7 (0.3–1.6), p = .37
 Q2.b. (content of question not reported) 86% (37/43) 93% (52/56) OR = 2.3 (0.5–9.6), p = .27
 Q2.c. (content of question not reported) 51% (22/43) 28 (50% (28/56) OR = 1.0 (0.4–2.5), p = .93
 Q2.d. (content of question not reported) 91% (39/43) 98% (55/56) OR = 5.7 (0.6–53.4), p = .13
 Q2.e. (content of question not reported) 70% (30/43) 79% (44/56) OR = 1.8 (0.6–5.1), p = .30
 Q2.f. (content of question not reported) 58% (25/43) 59% (33/56) OR = 1.1 (0.5–2.7), p = .81
Hu 2018 [17] Proportion of children who mastered the correct way of washing hands 76.67% (23/30) 96.67% (29/30) χ2 = 5.192, p < 0.05
Proportion of children who formed good habits of washing hands 66.67% (20/30) 96.67% (29/30) χ2 = 9.017, p < 0.05
Little 2015 [9] Proportion who said they washed hands 10+ times per day at 4-month follow-up 37.20% (3228/8667) 52.73% (4361/8270) OR = 1.96 (1.83, 2.10), p < 0.0001
Judah 2009 [19] Soap use ratio (soap use divided by number of restroom users in the trial period) in the men’s restroom; seven intervention domains, each compared to the blank passive control (relative increase, %):
 Disgust 0.317 0.348 (9.8%) p = .001
 Norms/ affiliation 0.317 0.347 (9.6%) p = .003
 Status/identity 0.317 0.343 (8.3%) p = .012
 Positive control 0.317 0.343 (8.2%) p = .010
 Cue 0.317 0.341 (7.7%) p = .014
 Comfort 0.317 0.341 (7.5%) p = .020
 Knowledge of risk 0.317 0.336 (6.0%) p = .044
 Knowledge activation 0.317 0.33 (5.1%) p = .093
Soap use ratio (soap use divided by number of restroom users in the trial period) in the women’s restroom; seven intervention domains, each compared to the blank passive control (relative increase, %):
 Knowledge activation 0.651 0.711 (9.4%) p = .001
 Positive control 0.651 0.708 (8.9%) p = .002
 Knowledge of risk 0.651 0.706 (8.6%) p = .003
 Norms/ affiliation 0.651 0.698 (7.3%) p = .008
 Status/identity 0.651 0.692 (6.4%) p = .021
 Disgust 0.651 0.683 (5.0%) p = .0.78
 Cue 0.651 0.674 (3.5%) p = .178
 Comfort 0.651 0.654 (0.6%) p = .832
Tidwell 2019 [20]
Study 2
Number of times per day that new mothers washed their hands with soap at end of study (M) 8.8 10.1 (Adj RR: 1.04) p = .035
Number of times per day that mothers of 4–7 year olds washed their hands with soap at end of study (M) 6.8 7.8 (Adj RR: 1.07) p = .007
Wu 2020 [21] Proportion of children who wash hands before eating and after going to the toilet at end of study 71.7% (987/1376) 93.6% (1300/1389) χ2 = 231.07, p < 0.01
Proportion of children who wash hands after going out at end of study 69.1% (951/1376) 92.6% (1286/1389) χ2 = 246.48, p < 0.01