Search

Background: We sought to determine whether the Good School Toolkit-Primary violence prevention intervention was associated with reduced victimisation and perpetration of peer and intimate partner violence four years later, and if any associations were moderated by sex and early adolescent: family connectedness, socio-economic status, and experience of violence outside of school., Methods: Drawing on schools involved in a randomised controlled trial of the intervention, we used a quasi-experimental design to compare violence outcomes between those who received the intervention during our trial (n = 1388), and those who did not receive the intervention during or after the trial (n = 522). Data were collected in 2014 (mean age 13.4, SD 1.5 years) from participants in 42 schools in Luwero District, Uganda, and 2018/19 from the same participants both in and out of school (mean age 18, SD: 1.77 years). We compared children who received the Good School Toolkit-Primary, a whole school violence prevention intervention, during a randomised controlled trial, to those who did not receive the intervention during or after the trial. Outcomes were measured using items adapted from the International Society for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect Child Abuse Screening Tool-Child Institutional. We used mixed-effect multivariable logistic regression, with school fitted as a random-effect to account for clustering., Results: 1910 adolescents aged about 16-19 years old were included in our analysis. We found no evidence of an average long-term intervention effect on our primary outcome, peer violence victimization at follow-up (aOR = 0.81, 95%CI = 0.59-1.11); or for any secondary outcome. However, exposure to the intervention was associated with: later reductions in peer violence, for adolescents with high family connectedness (aOR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.99), but not for those with low family connectedness (aOR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.6; p-interaction = 0.06); and reduced later intimate partner violence perpetration among males with high socio-economic status (aOR = 0.32, 95%CI 0.11 to 0.90), but not low socio-economic status (aOR = 1.01 95%CI 0.37 to 2.76, p-interaction = 0.05)., Conclusions: Young adolescents in connected families and with higher socio-economic status may be better equipped to transfer violence prevention skills from primary school to new relationships as they get older., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01678846, registration date 24 August 2012. Protocol for this paper:  https://www.researchprotocols.org/2020/12/e20940 ., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: No whole-school interventions which seek to reduce physical, sexual and emotional violence from peers, intimate partners and teachers have been trialled with adolescents. Here, we report a protocol for a pilot trial of the Good School Toolkit-Secondary Schools intervention, to be tested in Ugandan secondary schools. Our main objectives are to (1) refine the intervention, (2) to understand feasibility of delivery of the intervention and (3) to explore design parameters for a subsequent phase III trial., Methods and Analysis: We will conduct a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial, with two arms and parallel assignment. Eight schools will be randomly selected from a stratified list of all eligible schools in Kampala and Wakiso Districts. We will conduct a baseline survey and endline survey 18 months after the baseline, with 960 adolescents and 200 teachers. Qualitative data and mixed methods process data collection will be conducted throughout the intervention. Proportion of staff and students reporting acceptability, understanding and implementing with fidelity will be tabulated at endline for intervention schools. Proportions of schools consenting to participation, randomisation and proportions of schools and individual participants completing the baseline and endline surveys will be described in a Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials diagram., Ethics and Dissemination: The ethical requirements of our project are complex. Full approvals have been received from the Mildmay Ethics Committee (0407-2019), the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology (SS 6020) and the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (16212). Results of this study will be published in peer-reviewed academic journals, and shared with public bodies, policy makers, study participants and the general public in Uganda., Trial Registration Number: PACTR202009826515511., Competing Interests: Competing interests: DN, JN, BN and YL are employed by Raising Voices, and are all involved in the design and implementation of the Good School Toolkit-Secondary Schools., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Adaptation is a key strategy to extend the reach of evidence-based interventions to prevent violence in new populations, but there is a dearth of practical case examples. The Good School Toolkit was developed by Ugandan NGO Raising Voices for use in primary schools (GST-P). We describe our systematic approach to adapting the GST-P for use in secondary schools in Uganda, and reflect on the utility of the process as well as limitations of existing adaptation frameworks., Methods: We adapted the GST-P in four phases, which included: I) clarifying the logic model and core intervention components using a streamlined process; II) conducting formative research (cross-sectional survey, focus groups, etc.) to understand the new population; III) selecting and preparing new intervention components and modifying existing intervention components; and IV) pretesting new intervention components with teachers and students in Uganda., Results: We identified core components using a logic model. Formative research showed results largely in line with our apriori hypotheses. Teacher violence remained highly prevalent in secondary versus primary schools (> 65% of secondary students reported past year exposure), while peer violence significantly increased (secondary = 52% vs. primary girls = 40%, P < 0.001; secondary = 54% vs. primary boys = 44%, P = 0.009) in secondary versus primary schools. Significantly more secondary girls (51%) than secondary boys (45%) reported past year dating/intimate partner violence (P = 0.03). Inequitable, gendered educational practices emerged as a salient theme, perceived to heighten female students' vulnerability to violence. In light of these findings, we made several adjustments to the adapted intervention. We strengthened existing teacher and peer violence intervention components. We also developed, pretested and revised new program components to prevent dating violence and promote 'gender fairness in schools'. Finally, original activities were modified to support engagement with school administration and promote increased student agency in secondary schools., Conclusions: Based on our experience, it was difficult to apply mechanistic models to clarify the intervention logic of the GST-P, a complex multicomponent intervention, and simpler methods may be sufficient. Our team had high levels of contextual knowledge before the adaptation, and formative research to understand the new target population provided only limited additional insight. In similar situations, a simplified approach to mapping the core intervention components, qualitative research to understand the new target population, and pre-testing of new intervention components may be the most informative elements of systematic adaptation processes., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The Good School Toolkit, a complex behavioural intervention designed by Raising Voices a Ugandan NGO, reduced past week physical violence from school staff to primary students by an average of 42% in a recent randomised controlled trial. This process evaluation quantitatively examines what was implemented across the twenty-one intervention schools, variations in school prevalence of violence after the intervention, factors that influence exposure to the intervention and factors associated with students' experience of physical violence from staff at study endline., Methods: Implementation measures were captured prospectively in the twenty-one intervention schools over four school terms from 2012 to 2014 and Toolkit exposure captured in the student (n = 1921) and staff (n = 286) endline cross-sectional surveys in 2014. Implementation measures and the prevalence of violence are summarised across schools and are assessed for correlation using Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient. Regression models are used to explore individual factors associated with Toolkit exposure and with physical violence at endline., Results: School prevalence of past week physical violence from staff against students ranged from 7% to 65% across schools at endline. Schools with higher mean levels of teacher Toolkit exposure had larger decreases in violence during the study. Students in schools categorised as implementing a 'low' number of program school-led activities reported less exposure to the Toolkit. Higher student Toolkit exposure was associated with decreased odds of experiencing physical violence from staff (OR: 0.76, 95%CI: 0.67-0.86, p-value< 0.001). Girls, students reporting poorer mental health and students in a lower grade were less exposed to the toolkit. After the intervention, and when adjusting for individual Toolkit exposure, some students remained at increased risk of experiencing violence from staff, including, girls, students reporting poorer mental health, students who experienced other violence and those reporting difficulty with self-care., Conclusions: Our results suggest that increasing students and teachers exposure to the Good School Toolkit within schools has the potential to bring about further reductions in violence. Effectiveness of the Toolkit may be increased by further targeting and supporting teachers' engagement with girls and students with mental health difficulties., Trial Registration: The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov , NCT01678846, August 24th 2012.

Purpose: We tested whether the Good School Toolkit reduces physical violence from peers and school staff toward students with and without disabilities in Ugandan primary schools., Methods: We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial, with data collected via cross-sectional surveys in 2012 and 2014. Forty-two primary schools in Luwero District, Uganda, were randomly assigned to receive the Good School Toolkit for 18 months, or to a waitlisted control group. The primary outcome was past week physical violence from school staff, measured by primary 5, 6, and 7 students' (aged 11-14 years) self-reports using the International Society for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect Child Abuse Screening Tool-Child Institutional. Disability was assessed through the six Short Set Washington Group questions on functioning. Analyses were by intention to treat., Results: At endline, 53% of control group students with no functional difficulties reported violence from peers or school staff, versus 84% of students with a disability. Prevalence of past week physical violence from school staff was lower in intervention schools than in the control schools after the intervention, in students with no functional difficulties (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = .41, 95% confidence interval [CI .26-.65]), students with some functional difficulties (aOR = .36, 95% CI .21-.63), and students with disabilities (aOR = .29, 95% CI .14-.59). The intervention also reduced violence from peers in young adolescents, with no evidence of a difference in effect by disability status., Conclusions: The Good School Toolkit is an effective intervention to reduce violence perpetrated by peers and school staff against young adolescents with disabilities in Ugandan primary schools., (Copyright © 2017 The Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We aimed to investigate whether the Good School Toolkit reduced emotional violence, severe physical violence, sexual violence and injuries from school staff to students, as well as emotional, physical and sexual violence between peers, in Ugandan primary schools. We performed a two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial with parallel assignment. Forty-two schools in one district were allocated to intervention (n = 21) or wait-list control (n = 21) arms in 2012. We did cross-sectional baseline and endline surveys in 2012 and 2014, and the Good School Toolkit intervention was implemented for 18 months between surveys. Analyses were by intention to treat and are adjusted for clustering within schools and for baseline school-level proportions of outcomes. The Toolkit was associated with an overall reduction in any form of violence from staff and/or peers in the past week towards both male (aOR = 0.34, 95%CI 0.22-0.53) and female students (aOR = 0.55, 95%CI 0.36-0.84). Injuries as a result of violence from school staff were also lower in male (aOR = 0.36, 95%CI 0.20-0.65) and female students (aOR = 0.51, 95%CI 0.29-0.90). Although the Toolkit seems to be effective at reducing violence in both sexes, there is some suggestion that the Toolkit may have stronger effects in boys than girls. The Toolkit is a promising intervention to reduce a wide range of different forms of violence from school staff and between peers in schools, and should be urgently considered for scale-up. Further research is needed to investigate how the intervention could engage more successfully with girls.

Objective: To conduct a multilevel analysis of risk factors for physical violence perpetration by school staff against Ugandan students., Design: Multilevel logistic regression analysis of cross-sectional survey data from 499 staff and 828 caregivers of students at 38 primary schools, collected in 2012 and 2014 during the Good Schools Study., Setting: Luwero District, Uganda., Main Outcome Measure: Past-week use of physical violence by school staff against students was measured using the International Society for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect 'Child Abuse Screening Tool- Child International' and the WHO Multi-Country Study on Women's Health and Domestic Violence against Women., Results: Of 499 staff, 215 (43%) reported perpetration of physical violence against students in the past week. Individual risk factors associated with physical violence perpetration included being a teacher versus another type of staff member (p<0.001), approving of physical discipline practices (p<0.001), having children (p<0.01), being age 30-39 years (p<0.05), using physical violence against non-students (p<0.05) and being a victim of intimate partner violence (IPV) (p<0.05). We observed weak evidence (p=0.06) that male staff members who had been a victim of IPV showed higher odds of violence perpetration compared with male staff who had not been a victim of IPV. No evidence was observed for school- or community-level risk factors., Conclusions: Physical violence perpetration from school staff is widespread, and interventions are needed to address this issue. Staff who have been victims of violence and who use violence against people other than students may benefit from additional interventions. Researchers should further investigate how school and community contexts influence staff's physical violence usage, given a lack of associations observed in this study., Competing Interests: Competing interests: DN developed the Good School Toolkit. This article reports on analyses of baseline and endline surveys from a trial evaluating the Toolkit. No other authors have any competing interests to report., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

The Good School Toolkit, a complex behavioural intervention delivered in Ugandan primary schools, has been shown to reduce school staff-perpetrated physical violence against students. We aimed to assess the effect of this intervention on staff members' mental health, sense of job satisfaction and perception of school climate. We analysed data from a cluster-randomised trial administered in 42 primary schools in Luwero district, Uganda. The trial was comprised of cross-sectional baseline (June/July 2012) and endline (June/July 2014) surveys among staff and students. Twenty-one schools were randomly selected to receive the Toolkit, whilst 21 schools constituted a wait-listed control group. We generated composite measures to assess staff members' perceptions of the school climate and job satisfaction. The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01678846). No schools dropped out of the study and all 591 staff members who completed the endline survey were included in the analysis. Staff in schools receiving the Toolkit had more positive perspectives of their school climate compared to staff in control schools (difference in mean scores 2.19, 95% Confidence Interval 0.92, 3.39). We did not find any significant differences for job satisfaction and mental health. In conclusion, interventions like the Good School Toolkit that reduce physical violence by school staff against students can improve staff perceptions of the school climate, and could help to build more positive working and learning environments in Ugandan schools., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The nature and structure of the school environment has the potential to shape children's health and well being. Few studies have explored the importance of school-level factors in explaining a child's likelihood of experiencing violence from school staff, particularly in low-resource settings such as Uganda., Methods: To quantify to what extent a student's risk of violence is determined by school-level factors we fitted multilevel logistic regression models to investigate associations and present between-school variance partition coefficients. School structural factors, academic and supportive environment are explored., Results: 53% of students reported physical violence from staff. Only 6% of variation in students' experience of violence was due to differences between schools and half the variation was explained by the school-level factors modelled. Schools with a higher proportion of girls are associated with increased odds of physical violence from staff. Students in schools with a high level of student perceptions of school connectedness have a 36% reduced odds of experiencing physical violence from staff, but no other school-level factor was significantly associated., Conclusion: Our findings suggest that physical violence by school staff is widespread across different types of schools in this setting, but interventions that improve students' school connectedness should be considered., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.)

Background: Violence against children from school staff is widespread in various settings, but few interventions address this. We tested whether the Good School Toolkit-a complex behavioural intervention designed by Ugandan not-for-profit organisation Raising Voices-could reduce physical violence from school staff to Ugandan primary school children., Methods: We randomly selected 42 primary schools (clusters) from 151 schools in Luwero District, Uganda, with more than 40 primary 5 students and no existing governance interventions. All schools agreed to be enrolled. All students in primary 5, 6, and 7 (approximate ages 11-14 years) and all staff members who spoke either English or Luganda and could provide informed consent were eligible for participation in cross-sectional baseline and endline surveys in June-July 2012 and 2014, respectively. We randomly assigned 21 schools to receive the Good School Toolkit and 21 to a waitlisted control group in September, 2012. The intervention was implemented from September, 2012, to April, 2014. Owing to the nature of the intervention, it was not possible to mask assignment. The primary outcome, assessed in 2014, was past week physical violence from school staff, measured by students' self-reports using the International Society for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect Child Abuse Screening Tool-Child Institutional. Analyses were by intention to treat, and are adjusted for clustering within schools and for baseline school-level means of continuous outcomes. The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01678846., Findings: No schools left the study. At 18-month follow-up, 3820 (92·4%) of 4138 randomly sampled students participated in a cross-sectional survey. Prevalence of past week physical violence was lower in the intervention schools (595/1921, 31·0%) than in the control schools (924/1899, 48·7%; odds ratio 0·40, 95% CI 0·26-0·64, p<0·0001). No adverse events related to the intervention were detected, but 434 children were referred to child protective services because of what they disclosed in the follow-up survey., Interpretation: The Good School Toolkit is an effective intervention to reduce violence against children from school staff in Ugandan primary schools., Funding: MRC, DfID, Wellcome Trust, Hewlett Foundation., (Copyright © 2015 Devries et al. Open access article published under the terms of CC BY. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The authors reflect on how responses to the COVID-19 pandemic could boost children's exposure to neglect and violence and present strategies to prevent violence against children within the pandemic response. Also cited are the number of children who suffer physical, sexual or emotional violence annually, the responses to the pandemic like school closures, social distancing, and limited access to health, social and legal services, and the need to integrate prevention measures in said responses.