Intervention Now to Eliminate Repeat Unintended Pregnancy in Teenagers (INTERUPT): A systematic review of intervention effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, qualitative and realist synthesis of implementation factors and user engagement

BMJ Open

Volumn 4, Issue 4, 2014, Pages

  Whitaker, Rh ^a   Hendry, M ^a   Booth, A ^b   Carter, B ^c   Charles, J ^a   Craine, N ^d   Edwards, R T ^a   Lyons, M ^e   Noyes, J ^f   Pasterfield, D ^a   Rycroft Malone, J ^f   Williams, N ^a  

^a BANGOR UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^c CARDIFF UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

^d PUBLIC HEALTH WALES   (United Kingdom)

^e Public Health Wales   (United Kingdom)

^f BANGOR UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT PREGNANCY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; HUMAN; PEER REVIEW; PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REPRODUCTION; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; UNPLANNED PREGNANCY; ADOLESCENT; COMMUNITY CARE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH CARE POLICY; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PREGNANCY; RECURRENT DISEASE; RISK FACTOR;

ADOLESCENT; COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY IN ADOLESCENCE; PREGNANCY, UNPLANNED; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RECURRENCE; RISK FACTORS;

EID: 84899509362     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20446055     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004733     Document Type: Review

References (44)

1. Office for National Statistics. UK National Statistics Publication Hub: conception and fertility rates. 2011.
2. UNICEF. Child poverty and perspective: an overview of child well being in rich countries. Innocenti Report Card 7. Florence: UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, 2007.
3. Department of Health. Teenage pregnancy strategy: beyond 2010. 2010.
4. Welsh Assembly Government. Sexual Health and Wellbeing Action Plan For Wales, 2010-2015. 2010.
5. Northern Ireland Department of Health SSaPS. Sexual Health Promotion Strategy & Action Plan 2008-2013. 2008.
6. The Scottish Executive. Respect and Responsibility: Strategy and Action Plan for Improving Sexual Health. 2005.
7. Parker R, et al. Teenage Pregnancy Strategy Evaluation: Final report synthesis. 2005.
8. The Teenage Pregnancy Independent Advisory Group (TPIAG). Teenage pregnancy: you can make a real difference to teenage pregnancy, (undated).
9. Rowlands S. Social predictors of repeat adolescent pregnancy and focused strategies. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2010;24:605-16.
10. Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre. EPPI-Centre methods for conducting systematic reviews. University of London, 2007.
11. Thomas J, Sutcliffe K, Harden A, et al. Children and healthy eating: a systematic review of barriers and facilitators. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London, 2003.
12. Flemming K, Briggs M. Electronic searching to locate qualitative research: evaluation of three strategies. J Adv Nurs 2006;57:95-100. (Pubitemid 44973845)
13. Shaw R, Booth A, Sutton A, et al. Finding qualitative research: an evaluation of search strategies. BMC Med Res Methodol 2004;4:5.
14. O'Cathain A, Thomas K, Drabble S, et al. What can qualitative research do for randomised controlled trials? A systematic mapping review. BMJ Open 2013;3:e002889.
15. NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination: University of York. Preventing and reducing the adverse effects of unintended teenage pregnancies. Effective Health Care 1997;3.
16. Oringanje C, Meremikwu M, Eko H, et al. Interventions for preventing unintended pregnancies among adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;(4):CD005215.
17. Pace R, Pluye P, Bartlett G, et al. Testing the reliability and efficiency of the pilot Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) for systematic mixed studies review. Int J Nurs Stud 2012;49:47-53.
18. Drummond M, Jefferson T. The BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. BMJ 1996;313:275-83. (Pubitemid 26254740)
19. Philips Z, Ginnelly L, Sculpher M, et al. Review of guidelines for good practice in decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment. Health Technol Assess 2004;8:iii-iv, ix-xi, 1-158.
20. Shemilt I, Mugford M, Byford S, et al. Chapter 15: Incorporating economics evidence. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors), Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org
21. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Schunemann HJ, et al. GRADE guidelines: a new series of articles in the journal of clinical epidemiology. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:380-2.
22. Glenton C, Colvin C, Carlsen B, et al. Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of lay health worker programmes to improve access to maternal and child health: qualitative evidence synthesis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013;2:CD010414. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD010414
23. Tennison B. Understanding data, information, and knowledge. In: Guest C, Ricciardi W, Kawachi I, Lang I, eds. Oxford handbook of public health practice. 3rd edn. pp 74-83. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
24. Greenhalgh T, Robert G, MacFarlane F, et al. Diffusions of innovation in service organisations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q 2004;82:581-629. (Pubitemid 40143100)
25. Ueffing E, Tugwell P, Welch V, et al. For the Campbell and Cochrane Equity Methods Group. Equity Checklist for Systematic Review Authors. Version 2012-10-02, 2009.
26. Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG (editors). Chapter 9: Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. www.cochrane-handbook.org.
27. Sterne JAC, Egger M, Moher D, eds. Chapter 10: Addressing reporting biases. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention. Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. www.cochrane-handbook.org
28. Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ, Altman DG (editors). Chapter 16: Special topics in statistics. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors), Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. www.cochrane-handbook.org
29. Ritchie L, Spencer J. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In: Bryman A, Burgess R, eds. Analysing qualitative data. London: Routledge, 1994:173-94.
30. Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: a realist perspective. London: Sage, 2006.
31. Rycroft-Malone J, McCormack B, DeCorby K, et al. Chapter 25. Realist synthisis. In: Gerrish K, Lacey A, eds. The research process in nursing. 6th edition. Chichester,West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010.
32. Greenhalgh T, Kristjansson E, Robinson V. Realist review to understand the efficacy of school feeding programmes. BMJ 2007;335:858-61. (Pubitemid 350069459)
33. Rycroft-Malone J, McCormack B, Hutchinson A, et al. Realist synthesis: illustrating the method for implementation research. Implement Sci 2012;7:33.
34. Kelly M, McDaid D, Ludbrook A, et al. Economic appraisal of public health interventions. London: Health Development Agency, 2005.
35. Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, et al. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: new guidance. Medical Research Council, 2008. http://www.mrc.ac.uk/complexinterventionsguidance
36. Vos T, Carter R, Barendregt J, et al. Assessing Cost-Effectiveness in Prevention (ACE-Prevention): Final Report. University of Queensland, Brisbane and Deakin University, Melbourne. http://www.sph.uq.edu.au/bodce-ace-prevention
37. Payne K, McAllister M, Davies L. Valuing the economic benefits of complex interventions: when maximising health is not sufficient. Health Econ 2013;22:258-71.
38. Moher D, Liberat iA, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. BMJ 2009;339:b2535.
39. Stroup D, Berlin J, Morton S, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 2000;283:2008-12. (Pubitemid 30214957)
40. Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, et al. RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC Med 2013;11:20.
41. Noyes J, Popay J, Pearson A, et al. Chapter 20: Qualitative research and Cochrane reviews. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. www.cochrane-handbook.org
42. Oliver S, Harden A, Rees R, et al. An emerging framework for including different types of evidence in systematic reviews for public policy. Evaluation 2005;11:428-46.
43. Thomas J, Harden A, Oakly A, et al. Integrating qualitative research with trials in systematic reviews: an example form public health. BMJ 2004;328:1010-12. (Pubitemid 38530378)
44. Shepperd S, Lewin S, Straus S, et al. Can we systematically review studies that evaluate complex interventions? PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000086.