The evidence rating is scored out of four and provides an assessment of the evidence (i.e. research) underpinning the program, including impact and quality.
The implementation rating is scored out of four and provides an assessment of the program's training, support and acceptability by participants and instructors.
Positive impact on at least one outcome for children and/or young people
The study reported positive outcomes (i.e. a p-value less than 0.05 is statistically significant). Response options:
Link between program description and theory of change
Theory of change refers to whether there was a comprehensive description and illustration of how and why a desired change is expected to happen in a particular context. Response options:
Type of study design reported. Response options:
- Qualitative: Studies that utilise non-numbers-based data collection, such as case studies, interviews, observational or narrative designs.
- Cohort study (with post measures only): An observational study design where researchers record their observations of a population or sample (i.e. cohort). Post measures only refers to recording observations after a behaviour or intervention has occurred.
- Cohort study (with pre-post measures): As above, but the cohort is measured before and after a behaviour or intervention has occurred.
- Quasi-experimental study:Studies looking at whether an intervention has an impact on a person’s behaviour or outcomes, but without random allocation to intervention or control groups designed to estimate the causal impact of an intervention on target population without random assignment.
- Randomised controlled trial (RCT): Studies where participants are randomly assigned to either a control or intervention group to test the effect of the intervention.
The degree to which the program authors were involved in the research. Response options:
- Not independent
- Completely independent
Acceptance of program by participants
Study reported participants enjoyed the program and understood its benefits. Response options:
Acceptance of program by instructors
Study reported instructors enjoyed the program and understood its benefits. Response options:
Groups program is not suitable for
Groups the program wouldn't be suitable for or that required further research to determine suitability. Response options:
Program developers reported what model of training was employed. For example, ‘train-the-trainer’ is a type of training where one person receives training from the organisation, then trains other team members. Response options:
Program developers reported whether ongoing support was provided following original training. Response options:
Pre school, primary school (Foundation to Year 6), secondary school (Years 7 to 12).
The location in which the evidence or research was conducted.
The state (or states) the program was assessed in Australia.
Evaluation of program in low socioeconomic groups
Program has evaluated a diverse socio-economic population in their research. Response options:
Developmental-based adaptations to program design and delivery
Program provides shorter sessions for younger students or activities are adjusted for age appropriateness. Response options:
Evaluation of program in culturally and linguistically diverse populations
Program has included participants from culturally and linguistically diverse communities when assessing the efficacy of their program. Response options:
Evaluation of program in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people
Program has included Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples when assessing the efficacy of their program. Response options:
Evaluation of program in children and young people with disability and/or learning difference
Program has included participants with a disability or learning difference. Response options: