| Title |
Using the Medical Research Council framework for development and evaluation of complex interventions in a low resource setting to develop a theory-based treatment support intervention delivered via SMS text message to improve blood pressure control
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12913-017-2808-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kirsten Bobrow, Andrew Farmer, Nomazizi Cishe, Ntobeko Nwagi, Mosedi Namane, Thomas P. Brennan, David Springer, Lionel Tarassenko, Naomi Levitt |
| Abstract |
Several frameworks now exist to guide intervention development but there remains only limited evidence of their application to health interventions based around use of mobile phones or devices, particularly in a low-resource setting. We aimed to describe our experience of using the Medical Research Council (MRC) Framework on complex interventions to develop and evaluate an adherence support intervention for high blood pressure delivered by SMS text message. We further aimed to describe the developed intervention in line with reporting guidelines for a structured and systematic description. We used a non-sequential and flexible approach guided by the 2008 MRC Framework for the development and evaluation of complex interventions. We reviewed published literature and established a multi-disciplinary expert group to guide the development process. We selected health psychology theory and behaviour change techniques that have been shown to be important in adherence and persistence with chronic medications. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with various stakeholders identified ways in which treatment adherence could be supported and also identified key features of well-regarded messages: polite tone, credible information, contextualised, and endorsed by identifiable member of primary care facility staff. Direct and indirect user testing enabled us to refine the intervention including refining use of language and testing of interactive components. Our experience shows that using a formal intervention development process is feasible in a low-resource multi-lingual setting. The process enabled us to pre-test assumptions about the intervention and the evaluation process, allowing the improvement of both. Describing how a multi-component intervention was developed including standardised descriptions of content aimed to support behaviour change will enable comparison with other similar interventions and support development of new interventions. Even in low-resource settings, funders and policy-makers should provide researchers with time and resources for intervention development work and encourage evaluation of the entire design and testing process. The trial of the intervention is registered with South African National Clinical Trials Register number (SANCTR DOH-27-1212-386; 28/12/2012); Pan Africa Trial Register (PACTR201411000724141; 14/12/2013); ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02019823 ; 24/12/2013). |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 285 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 285 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 43 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 39 | 14% |
| Researcher | 30 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 15 | 5% |
| Other | 53 | 19% |
| Unknown | 89 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 72 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 42 | 15% |
| Psychology | 18 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 16 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 7 | 2% |
| Other | 32 | 11% |
| Unknown | 98 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 07 December 2021.
All research outputs
#7,794,530
of 23,668,780 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#3,839
of 7,891 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,031
of 444,023 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#102
of 165 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,668,780 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,891 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 444,023 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 165 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.