Comparison of the pre–post and transition question assessments in a health education setting

Abstract

Objective This study examined the classical pre-intervention/post-intervention assessment (pre–post) and the single post-intervention transition question assessment (transition question) to determine how well these methods reflected qualitative interview–based participant-reported outcomes from chronic disease self-management education programs (CDSMEPs). Study Design and Setting A mixed-method qualitative and quantitative approach was applied in 25 interviews with participants recruited from CDSMEPs within Australia. Qualitative interviews with participants were used as a relative “gold standard” and compared with questionnaire-based pre–post and transition question assessments. Results Comparison of the two questionnaire-based assessments showed that most of the individual paired responses were discordant (61%). Using participant's qualitative narratives as a “true” indicator, the pre–post assessment was found on more occasions to be discordant with participant-reported outcomes than the transition question. The origin of the inconsistency was largely because of a change in respondents' perspective that had occurred after pretest, which was mediated by CDSMEPs' experiences and insights. Conclusion This study suggests that the pre–post assessment has poor validity for the assessment of health education program outcomes. Alternative assessments, such as the transition question, may result in a more accurate reflection of the impact of such programs on participants.