Dataset Information

Evaluation of the Pint of Science festival in Thailand.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The Pint of Science festival is the biggest annual international science festival. In May 2017, we coordinated the first Pint of Science festival in Thailand and reported our initial reflections. Building on this work, we set out to evaluate more systematically events conducted in 2018.

Methods

In 2018, we conducted Pint of Science events at four different locations in Bangkok. Overall, there were 18 talks held over six event-days in 2018. We administered 180 self-reported questionnaires as well as conducted 11 semi-structured interviews and a focus group discussion with audience members and speakers.

Results

Of the 180 questionnaires handed out, 125 attendees completed the questionnaire. The majority of attendees came because they were interested in science (68.0%), to learn something new (46.4%) and to enjoy themselves (44.8%). Our qualitative results confirm the quantitative findings. In addition, speakers viewed that they benefited by improving their communication skills and having the opportunity to network with scientists and non-scientists. Speakers also mentioned that such events were a good means to engage with the public, can improve the visibility of their work and potentially attract more funding. To improve the Pint of Science activities, audience members suggested to include a more diverse range of topics, more collaborations with other local research institutions and to hold the event at larger venues.

Conclusions

We conclude that Pint of Science was well received in Bangkok with recommendations to improve minor issues related to practicalities and logistics.

SUBMITTER: Adhikari B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6638989 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundGood Grief Festival was originally planned as a face-to-face festival about grief and bereavement. Due to COVID-19, it was held online over 3 days in October 2020.ObjectiveTo evaluate the festival's reach and impact.DesignPre/post evaluation.MethodsPre-festival online surveys assessed reasons for attending and attitudes to bereavement across four items (fear of saying the wrong thing, avoiding talking to someone bereaved, knowing what to do if someone bereaved was struggling, knowing how to help). Post-festival online surveys evaluated audience experiences and the four attitude items. Free-text responses, analysed using thematic analysis, generated suggestions for improvement and general comments.ResultsBetween 5003 and 6438 people attended, with most attending two to five events. Pre-festival survey participants (n = 3785) were mostly women (91%) and White (91%). About 9% were from Black or minoritised ethnic communities. About 14% were age ⩾65 years, 16% age ⩽34 years. Around 75% were members of the public, teachers, students or 'other'; 25% academics, clinicians or bereavement counsellors. A third had been bereaved in the last year; 6% had never been bereaved. People attended to learn about grief/bereavement (77%), be inspired (52%) and feel part of a community (49%). Post-festival participants (n = 685) reported feeling part of a community (68%), learning about grief/bereavement (68%) and being inspired (66%). 89% rated the festival as excellent/very good and 75% agreed that they felt more confident talking about grief after attending. Higher ratings and confidence were associated with attending more events. Post-festival attitudes were improved across all four items (p < 0.001). Attendees appreciated the festival, particularly valuing the online format, opportunities for connection during lockdown and the diversity and quality of speakers. Suggestions included improving registration, more interactive events and less content.ConclusionGood Grief Festival successfully reached a large public audience, with benefit in engagement, confidence and community-building. Evaluation was critical in shaping future events. Findings suggest festivals of this nature can play a central role in increasing death- and grief-literacy within a public health approach.

Project description:IntroductionRotavirus gastroenteritis is the leading cause of severe diarrhoea among young children < 5 years old. Previous cost-effectiveness analyses on rotavirus (RV) vaccination in Thailand have generated conflicting results. The aim of this current study is to evaluate the economic impact of introducing RV vaccination in Thailand, using updated Thai epidemiological and cost data.MethodsBoth cost-utility analysis (CUA) and budget impact analysis (BIA) of human rotavirus vaccine (HRV) under a universal mass vaccination (UMV) programme were conducted. A published static, deterministic, cross-sectional population model was adapted to assess costs and health outcomes associated with RV vaccination among Thai children < 5 years old during 1 year for CUA and over a 5-year period (2019-2023) for BIA. Data identified through literature review were incorporated into the model after consultation with local experts. Base case CUA was conducted from a societal perspective with quality-adjusted life year (QALY) discounted at 3% annually. Scenario analyses as well as one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the base case CUA results. Costs were updated to 2017.ResultsAt 99% coverage, HRV vaccination would substantially reduce RV-related disease burden. With an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of Thai baht (THB) 49,923/QALY gained, HRV vaccination versus no vaccination was cost-effective when assessed against a local threshold of THB 160,000/QALY gained. Scenario and sensitivity analyses confirmed the cost-effectiveness with all resultant ICERs falling below the willingness-to-pay threshold. HRV use in the UMV programme was estimated to result in a net expenditure of about THB 255-281 million to the Thai government in the 5th year of the programme, depending on vaccine uptake.ConclusionHRV vaccination is estimated to be cost-effective in Thailand. The budget impact following inclusion of HRV into the UMV programme is expected to be partially offset by substantial reductions in RV-related disease costs.FundingGlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA GSK STUDY IDENTIFIER: HO-17-18213.