X hits on this document

274 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

42 / 88

MARCH Outcome Evaluation

5.5. Exposure to the MARCH and attitude towards PLWHAs

Promoting positive and non-stigmatizing environments for PLWHAs and affected families was among the objectives of the MARCH intervention. In this assessment a number of items (questions) were used to generate scores for the positive attitude towards PLWHAs and non-differential treatment of PLWHAs among respondents of the outcome survey. Since such information was not available at baseline, this analysis entirely based on the outcome survey data. Besides, due to difficulty in responding to such questions and the fact that a substantial proportion of the respondents from West Hararghe did not respond to these questions, only the data from Addis Ababa were used for this particular assessment.

Box 2. Items used for Attitude towards PLWHAs

Items used for Attitude towards PLWHAs

1.

For most people with HIV, it is their own fault that they got HIV.

2.

People with HIV/AIDS should be ashamed of themselves.

3.

People with HIV/AIDS can remain productive members of society.

4.

People with HIV/AIDS have nothing to feel guilty or ashamed about.

5.

People who say they are HIV/AIDS positive are brave and strong.

6.

People with HIV/AIDS present a threat to their own and their families’ health.

7.

People with HIV/AIDS deserve sympathy.

8.

People with HIV/AIDS deserve treatment and care.

9.

The family of the person with HIV/AIDS is also to blame.

10.

The family of PLWHA is cursed and should be avoided and isolated.

11.

People with HIV/AIDS are promiscuous.

12.

Women get HIV because they are prostitutes

A total of 12 items (questions) were used to measure respondents’ attitude towards PLWHAs (Box 2). Each of the items was scored on a 5-point Likert scale, where 1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 5 = disagree; and 6=strongly disagree.

Box 3. Items used for differential treatment of PLWHAs

Items used for the presence of differential treatment of PLWHAs

1.

If a relative of yours had HIV/AIDS, would you be willing to care for him in your household?

2.

If a teacher had HIV/AIDS, should he or she be allowed to continue teaching in school?

3.

If a student has HIV/AIDS, should he or she be allowed to continue attending school?  

4.

If you knew that a shopkeeper or food seller had HIV/AIDS, would you buy food from them?

5.

If a religious leader in your church/mosque had HIV/AIDS, would you continue to attend the church/mosque?

Five items (questions) were used to measure the presence of differential treatment of PLWHAs by the respondents (Box 3). Each of the items was scored on a 5-point Likert scale, where 1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 5 = disagree; and 6=strongly disagree.

As part of generating the scores for both of the indicators, the internal consistency of responses to these items (i.e. the scale reliability coefficients) were estimated using the Cronbach's alpha statistics.  If there is no true score but only error in the items (which is esoteric and unique, and, therefore, uncorrelated across subjects), then the variance of the sum will be the same as the sum of variances of the individual items.

Addis Ababa and West Hararghe

Document info
Document views274
Page views274
Page last viewedFri Dec 09 10:08:25 UTC 2016
Pages88
Paragraphs1879
Words20990

Comments