| Title |
Testing an Integrated Model of Program Implementation: the Food, Health & Choices School-Based Childhood Obesity Prevention Intervention Process Evaluation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Prevention Science, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11121-016-0736-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marissa Burgermaster, Heewon Lee Gray, Elizabeth Tipton, Isobel Contento, Pamela Koch |
| Abstract |
Childhood obesity is a complex, worldwide problem. Significant resources are invested in its prevention, and high-quality evaluations of these efforts are important. Conducting trials in school settings is complicated, making process evaluations useful for explaining results. Intervention fidelity has been demonstrated to influence outcomes, but others have suggested that other aspects of implementation, including participant responsiveness, should be examined more systematically. During Food, Health & Choices (FHC), a school-based childhood obesity prevention trial designed to test a curriculum and wellness policy taught by trained FHC instructors to fifth grade students in 20 schools during 2012-2013, we assessed relationships among facilitator behaviors (i.e., fidelity and teacher interest); participant behaviors (i.e., student satisfaction and recall); and program outcomes (i.e., energy balance-related behaviors) using hierarchical linear models, controlling for student, class, and school characteristics. We found positive relationships between student satisfaction and recall and program outcomes, but not fidelity and program outcomes. We also found relationships between teacher interest and fidelity when teachers participated in implementation. Finally, we found a significant interaction between fidelity and satisfaction on behavioral outcomes. These findings suggest that individual students in the same class responded differently to the same intervention. They also suggest the importance of teacher buy-in for successful intervention implementation. Future studies should examine how facilitator and participant behaviors together are related to both outcomes and implementation. Assessing multiple aspects of implementation using models that account for contextual influences on behavioral outcomes is an important step forward for prevention intervention process evaluations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Taiwan | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 133 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 21 | 16% |
| Researcher | 16 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 23 | 17% |
| Unknown | 38 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 16% |
| Psychology | 13 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 8% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 16 | 12% |
| Unknown | 47 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 February 2017.
All research outputs
#15,443,875
of 22,953,506 outputs
Outputs from Prevention Science
#778
of 1,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251,617
of 416,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Prevention Science
#14
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,953,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,034 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 416,532 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.