ACTION live: Using process evaluation to describe implementation of a Worksite Wellness Program

Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine

Volumn 52, Issue SUPPL. 1, 2010, Pages

  Johnson, Carolyn C ^a   Lai, Yen Ling ^a   Rice, Janet ^a   Rose, Diego ^a   Webber, Larry S ^a  

^a TULANE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; NUTRITION; NUTRITION EDUCATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; SCHOOL HEALTH SERVICE; SELF REPORT; TEACHER; UNITED STATES; WELLBEING; WORK ENVIRONMENT;

EID: 75749148848     PISSN: 10762752     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/JOM.0b013e3181c81ade     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Green SB. The advantages of community-randomized trials for evaluating lifestyle modification. Control Clin Trials. 1997;18:506-513.
2. Campbell DT, Stanley JC. Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Research. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company; 1963.
3. Dumas JE, Lynch AM, Laughlin JE, Phillips Smith E, Prinz RJ. Promoting intervention fidelity. Conceptual issues, methods, and preliminary results from the EARLY ALLIANCE prevention trial. Am J Prev Med. 2001;20(1 Suppl):38-47.
4. Baranowski T, Stables G. Process evaluations of the 5-a-day projects. Health Educ Behav. 2000;27:157-166.
5. Steckler A, Ethelbah B, Martin CJ, et al.. Pathways process evaluation results: a school-based prevention trial to promote healthful diet and physical activity in American Indian third, fourth, and fifth grade students. Prev Med. 2003;37:S80-S90.
6. Perry CL, Sellers, DE, Johnson C, et al.. The Child and Adolescent Trial for Cardiovascular Health (CATCH): intervention, implementation, and feasibility for elementary schools in the United States. Health Educ Behav. 1997;24:716-735.
7. Helitzer DL, Davis SM, Gittelsohn J, et al.. Process evaluation in a multisite, primary obesity-prevention trial in American Indian school children. Am J Clin Nutr. 1999;69:816S- 824S.
8. Pratt CC, McGuidan WM, Katzev AR. Measuring program outcomes: using retrospective pretest methodology. Am J Eval. 2000;21:341-349.
9. Schulz AJ, Israel BA, Lantz P. Instrument for evaluating dimensions of group dynamics within community-based participatory research partnerships. Eval Program Plann. 2003;26:249-262.
10. Lantz PM, Viruell-Fuentes E, Israel BA, Softley D, Guzman R. Can communities and academia work together on public health research? Evaluation results from a community-based participatory research partnership in Detroit. J Urban Health. 2001;78:495-507.
11. Webber LS, Johnson CC, Rose D, Rice JC. Development of ACTION! Wellness program for elementary school personnel. Obesity. 2007(15 Suppl 1);48S-56S.
12. Steckler A, Linnan L, eds. Process Evaluation for Public Health Interventions and Research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2002.
13. Young DR, Steckler A, Cohen S, et al.. Process evaluation results from a school- and community-linked intervention: the Trial of Activity for Adolescent Girls (TAAG). Health Educ Res. 2008;23:976-986.
14. Beresford SAA, Shannon J, McLerran D, Thompson B. Seattle 5-a-day work-site project: process evaluation. Health Educ Behav. 2000;27:213-222.
15. Dzewaltowski DA, Estabrooks PA, Klesges LM, Bull S, Glasgow RE. Behavior change intervention research in community settings: how generalizable are the results? Health Promot Int. 2004;19:235-245.
16. Crump CE, Earp JL, Kozma CM, Hertz-Picciotto I. Effect of organizationlevel variables on differential employee participation in 10 federal worksite health promotion programs. Health Educ Q. 1996;23:204-223.
17. Midanik LT, Polen MR, Hunkeler EM, Tekawa IS, Soghikian K. Methodologic issues in evaluating stop smoking programs. Am J Public Health. 1985;75:634-638.