Table 3.
Participants (n = 6) | Commune and Women’s Union representatives (n = 2) | |
---|---|---|
Value of activities done at home for putting into practice concepts covered in the session |
|
|
Extremely useful |
5 |
2 |
Useful |
1 |
- |
A little useful |
- |
- |
Not useful at all |
- |
- |
The three step structure to thinking healthy made it easy to understand and practice healthy thinking and healthy actions |
|
|
Strongly agree |
3 |
2 |
Agree |
3 |
- |
Neutral |
- |
- |
Disagree |
- |
- |
Strongly disagree |
- |
- |
Comprehensibility of language used |
|
|
All understandable |
6 |
2 |
Somewhat understandable |
- |
- |
Somewhat difficult to understand |
- |
- |
Mostly difficult to understand |
- |
- |
Comprehensibility of content |
|
|
Easy to understand |
|
- |
Understandable |
6 |
2 |
Somewhat understandable |
- |
- |
Difficult to understand |
- |
- |
Utility of program to pregnant women in the community |
|
|
Extremely useful |
5 |
2 |
Useful |
1 |
- |
A little useful |
- |
- |
Not useful at all |
- |
- |
Most suitable trainers for the program |
|
|
Commune health station health worker |
5 |
2 |
Village health worker |
- |
- |
Commune women’s union member |
2 |
1 |
Village women’s union member | - | - |