Applicability and transferability of interventions in evidence-based public health (original) (raw)
Related papers
Criteria for the systematic review of health promotion and public health interventions
Systematic reviews of public health interventions are fraught with challenges. Complexity is inherent; this may be due to multi-component interventions, diverse study populations, multiple outcomes measured, mixed study designs utilized and the effect of context on intervention design, implementation and effectiveness. For policy makers and practitioners to use systematic reviews to implement effective public health programmes, systematic reviews must include this information, which seeks to answer the questions posed by decision makers, including recipients of programmes. This necessitates expanding the traditional evaluation of evidence to incorporate the assessment of theory, integrity of interventions, context and sustainability of the interventions and outcomes.
A systematic review of adaptations of evidence-based public health interventions globally
Implementation Science, 2018
Background: Adaptations of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) often occur. However, little is known about the reasons for adaptation, the adaptation process, and outcomes of adapted EBIs. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic review to answer the following questions: (1) What are the reasons for and common types of adaptations being made to EBIs in community settings as reported in the published literature? (2) What steps are described in making adaptations to EBIs? and (3) What outcomes are assessed in evaluations of adapted EBIs? Methods: We conducted a systematic review of English language publications that described adaptations of public health EBIs. We searched Ovid PubMed, PsycINFO, PsycNET, and CINAHL and citations of included studies for adapted public health EBIs. We abstracted characteristics of the original and adapted populations and settings, reasons for adaptation, types of modifications, use of an adaptation framework, adaptation steps, and evaluation outcomes. Results: Forty-two distinct EBIs were found focusing on HIV/AIDS, mental health, substance abuse, and chronic illnesses. More than half (62%) reported on adaptations in the USA. Frequent reasons for adaptation included the need for cultural appropriateness (64.3%), focusing on a new target population (59.5%), and implementing in a new setting (57.1%). Common adaptations were content (100%), context (95.2%), cultural modifications (73.8%), and delivery (61.9%). Most study authors conducted a community assessment, prepared new materials, implemented the adapted intervention, evaluated or planned to evaluate the intervention, determined needed changes, trained staff members, and consulted experts/stakeholders. Most studies that reported an evaluation (k = 36) included behavioral outcomes (71.4%), acceptability (66.7%), fidelity (52.4%), and feasibility (52.4%). Fewer measured adoption (47.6%) and changes in practice (21.4%). Conclusions: These findings advance our understanding of the patterns and effects of modifications of EBIs that are reported in published studies and suggest areas of further research to understand and guide the adaptation process. Furthermore, findings can inform better reporting of adapted EBIs and inform capacity building efforts to assist health professionals in adapting EBIs.
Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 2006
Public health decision makers, funders, practitioners, and the public are increasingly interested in the evidence that underpins public health decision making. Decisions in public health cover a vast range of activities. With the ever increasing global volume of primary research, knowledge and changes in thinking and approaches, quality systematic reviews of all the available research that is relevant to a particular practice or policy decision are an efficient way to synthesise and utilise research efforts. The Cochrane Collaboration includes an organised entity that aims to increase the quality and quantity of public health systematic reviews, through a range of activities. This paper aims to provide a glossary of the terms and activities related to public health and the Cochrane Collaboration.
The challenges of systematically reviewing public health interventions
Journal of Public Health, 2004
Evidence-based public health concerns the development and implementation of effective programmes and policies. 1 For policy makers and practitioners to implement effective programmes they must have considered the information that is available on which interventions have been shown to work, or not to work (or caused harm). 2 One form of high quality evidence-based information available to decision makers is a systematic review of research of effectiveness. A systematic review is defined as 'a review of a clearly formulated question that uses systematic and explicit methods to identify, select and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect and analyse data from the studies included in the review'. Many of the tools of research synthesis were developed by American social scientists in the 1960s. 4 However, today's focus on evidence in health has been largely driven by the evidencebased medicine movement. Some authors have argued that there are concerns that in cost-conscious environments only those interventions for which there is sufficient evidence to complete a review would be supported. 5 In public health the infrastructure that supports and enables the conduct of a review lags behind that of evidence-based medicine and extends beyond the employment of randomized controlled trials. This increased complexity has resulted in an unfortunate focus on the appropriateness (or not) of randomized controlled trials as the priority study design rather than what constitutes evidence in public health and how this should be evaluated. 6,7 However, after diverging views, the focus has now moved towards ensuring that reviews in public health meet the needs of public health practitioners.
Improving the reporting of public health intervention research: advancing TREND and CONSORT
Journal of Public Health, 2008
Background Evidence-based public health decision-making depends on high quality and transparent accounts of what interventions are effective, for whom, how and at what cost. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized and non-randomized study designs through the CONSORT and TREND statements has had a marked impact on the quality of study designs. However, public health users of systematic reviews have been concerned with the paucity of synthesized information on context, development and rationale, implementation processes and sustainability factors.
A scoping study of frameworks for adapting public health evidence-based interventions
Translational behavioral medicine, 2018
Evidence-based public health translation of research to practice is essential to improve the public's health. Dissemination and implementation researchers have explored what happens once practitioners adopt evidence-based interventions (EBIs) and have developed models and frameworks to describe the adaptation process. This scoping study identified and summarized adaptation frameworks in published reports and grey literature. We followed the recommended steps of a scoping study: (a) identifying the research question; (b) identifying relevant studies; (c) selecting studies; (d) charting the data; (e) collating, summarizing, and reporting the results; and (f) consulting with experts. We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, PsycNET, and CINAHL databases for articles referencing adaptation frameworks for public health interventions in the published and gray literature, and from reference lists of framework articles. Two reviewers independently coded the frameworks and their steps and identifie...