Process evaluation design in a cluster randomised controlled childhood obesity prevention trial: The WAVES study

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2014, Pages

  Griffin, Tania L ^a   Pallan, Miranda J ^a   Clarke, Joanne L ^a   Lancashire, Emma R ^a   Lyon, Anna ^a   Parry, Jayne ^a   Adab, Peymane ^a   Barrett, Tim ^a   Cheng, K K ^a   Daley, Amanda ^a   Deeks, Jon ^a   Duda, Joan ^a   Frew, Emma ^a   Gill, Paramjit ^a   Hemming, Karla ^a   Pallan, Miranda ^a   Ekelund, Ulf ^b   Cade, Janet ^c   Bhopal, Raj ^d   McGee, Eleanor ^e   Passmore, Sandra ^f   more..

^a UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^b NORWEGIAN SCHOOL OF SPORT SCIENCES   (Norway)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^e Birmingham Dental School   (United Kingdom)

^f Birmingham Local Authority   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Childhood obesity prevention; Cluster randomised controlled trial; Implementation fidelity; Intervention; Process evaluation

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHILD; CHILD HEALTH CARE; CHILDHOOD OBESITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; FEEDING BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH PROMOTION; HUMAN; LIFESTYLE MODIFICATION; MALE; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PRIMARY SCHOOL; PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SCHOOL CHILD; UNITED KINGDOM; ADIPOSE TISSUE; BODY MASS; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; MOTOR ACTIVITY; ORGANIC FOOD; PEDIATRIC OBESITY; PROCEDURES; PROGRAM EVALUATION; SKINFOLD THICKNESS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; WAIST CIRCUMFERENCE;

ADIPOSE TISSUE; BODY MASS INDEX; CHILD; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; FOOD, ORGANIC; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HEALTH PROMOTION; HUMANS; MALE; MOTOR ACTIVITY; PEDIATRIC OBESITY; PROGRAM EVALUATION; SKINFOLD THICKNESS; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; TREATMENT OUTCOME; WAIST CIRCUMFERENCE;

EID: 84964314942     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14795868     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12966-014-0112-1     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M: Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ 2008, 337:a1665.
2. Oakley A, Strange V, Bonell C, Allen E, Stephenson J: Health services research: process evaluation in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions. BMJ 2006, 332:413.
3. Waters E, de Silva-Sanigorski A, Burford BJ, Brown T, Campbell KJ, Gao Y, Armstrong R, Prosser L, Summerbell CD: Interventions for preventing obesity in children. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, Issue 12. Art. No.: CD001871. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001871.pub3.
4. Grant A, Treweek S, Dreischulte T, Foy R, Guthrie B: Process evaluations for cluster-randomised trials of complex interventions: a proposed framework for design and reporting. Trials 2013, 14:15.
5. Hawe P, Shiell A, Riley T: Complex interventions: how "out of control" can a randomised controlled trial be? BMJ 2004, 328:1561.
6. Woodman J, Lorenc T, Harden A, Oakley A: Social and environmental interventions to reduce childhood obesity: a systematic map of reviews. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London; 2008.
7. Linnan LE, Steckler AE: Process evaluation for public health interventions and research. San Franciso: Jossey-Bass; 2002.
8. Baranowski T, Stables G: Process evaluations of the 5-a-day projects. Health Educ Behav 2000, 27:157-166.
9. Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM: Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health 1999, 89:1322-1327.
10. Proctor E, Silmere H, Raghavan R, Hovmand P, Aarons G, Bunger A, Griffey R, Hensley M: Outcomes for implementation research: conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Adm Policy Ment Health Ment Health Serv Res 2011, 38:65-76.
11. Dane AV, Schneider BH: Program integrity in primary and early secondary prevention: are implementation effects out of control? Clin Psychol Rev 1998, 18:23-45.
12. Dusenbury L, Brannigan R, Falco M, Hansen WB: A review of research on fidelity of implementation: implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings. Health Educ Res 2003, 18:237-256.
13. Gibson CA, Smith BK, DuBose KD, Greene JL, Bailey BW, Williams SL, Ryan JJ, Schmelzle KH, Washburn RA, Sullivan DK: Physical activity across the curriculum: year one process evaluation results. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2008, 5:36.
14. Helitzer DL, Davis SM, Gittelsohn J, Going SB, Murray DM, Snyder P, Steckler AB: Process evaluation in a multisite, primary obesity-prevention trial in American Indian schoolchildren. Am J Clin Nutr 1999, 69:816s-824s.
15. Schneider M, Hall W, Hernandez A, Hindes K, Montez G, Pham T, Rosen L, Sleigh A, Thompson D, Volpe S: Rationale, design and methods for process evaluation in the HEALTHY study. Int J Obes 2009, 33:S60-S67.
16. Robbins LB, Pfeiffer KA, Wesolek SM, Lo Y-J: Process evaluation for a school-based physical activity intervention for 6th-and 7th-grade boys: Reach, dose, and fidelity. Eval Program Plann 2014, 42:21-31.
17. Story M, Mays RW, Bishop DB, Perry CL, Taylor G, Smyth M, Gray C: 5-a-day Power Plus: process evaluation of a multicomponent elementary school program to increase fruit and vegetable consumption. Health Educ Behav 2000, 27:187-200.
18. Christian MS, Evans CE, Ransley JK, Greenwood DC, Thomas JD, Cade JE: Process evaluation of a cluster randomised controlled trial of a school-based fruit and vegetable intervention: Project Tomato. Public Health Nutr 2012, 15:459-465.
19. Salmon J, Ball K, Crawford D, Booth M, Telford A, Hume C, Jolley D, Worsley A: Reducing sedentary behaviour and increasing physical activity among 10-year-old children: overview and process evaluation of the 'Switch-Play'intervention. Health Promot Int 2005, 20:7-17.
20. Jenkinson KA, Naughton G, Benson AC: The GLAMA (Girls! Lead! Achieve! Mentor! Activate!) physical activity and peer leadership intervention pilot project: A process evaluation using the RE-AIM framework. BMC Public Health 2012, 12:55.
21. Jogova M, Song JE-S, Campbell AC, Warbuton D, Warshawski T, Chanoine J-P: Process Evaluation of the Living Green, Healthy and Thrifty (LiGHT) Web-Based Child Obesity Management Program: Combining Health Promotion with Ecology and Economy. Can J Diab 2013, 37:72-81.
22. Potter SC, Schneider D, Coyle KK, May G, Robin L, Seymour J: What Works? Process Evaluation of a School-Based Fruit and Vegetable Distribution Program in Mississippi. J Sch Health 2011, 81:202-211.
23. University of Birmingham WAVES study. In University of Birmingham; [http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/research/activity/mds/projects/HaPS/PHEB/ WAVES/about/index.aspx]
24. Pallan M, Parry J, Cheng KK, Adab P: Development of a childhood obesity prevention programme with a focus on UK South Asian communities. Prev Med 2013, 57:948-954.
25. Berman P, McLaughlin MW: Implementation of Educational Innovation. The Educational Forum 1976, 40:345-370.
26. Hawe P, Shiell A, Riley T, Gold L: Methods for exploring implementation variation and local context within a cluster randomised community intervention trial. J Epidemiol Community Health 2004, 58:788-793.
27. Activate in the classroom 2nd edition. Val Sabin publications; 2007 [http://www.valsabinpublications.com/publications/activate/]
28. Positive Play 3rd edition. Val Sabin publications; 2011 [http://www. valsabinpublications.com/publications/positive-play]
29. Take 10 Fit to Suceed. In 2004 [http://www.take10.org.uk/]
30. Wake Up Shake Up by Ruth Mitchell. In 2009 [http://www.wakeupshakeup.com]
31. Liu A, Hu X, Ma G, Cui Z, Pan Y, Chang S, Zhao W, Chen C: Evaluation of a classroom-based physical activity promoting programme. Obes Rev 2008, 9:130-134.
32. Mahar MT, Murphy SK, Rowe DA, Golden J, Shields AT, Raedeke TD: Effects of a classroom-based program on physical activity and on-task behavior. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2006, 38:2086.
33. Fagan AA, Hanson K, Hawkins JD, Arthur MW: Bridging science to practice: Achieving prevention program implementation fidelity in the Community Youth Development Study. Am J Community Psychol 2008, 41:235-249.
34. Lillehoj CJG, Griffin KW, Spoth R: Program provider and observer ratings of school-based preventive intervention implementation: Agreement and relation to youth outcomes. Health Educ Behav 2004, 31:242-257.
35. Saunders RP, Evans MH, Joshi P: Developing a process-evaluation plan for assessing health promotion program implementation: a how-to guide. Health Promot Pract 2005, 6:134-147.
36. Byers PY, Wilcox JR: Focus groups: A qualitative opportunity for researchers. J Bus Commun 1991, 28:63-78.
37. Mauthner M: Methodological aspects of collecting data from children: Lessons from three research projects. Child Soc 1997, 11:16-28.
38. Ritchie JS, Spencer L: Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In ?. Edited by Bryman A, Burgess R. London: Routledge; 1993.
39. Moore G, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Cooper C, Hardeman W, Moore L, O'Cathain A, Tinati T: Process evaluation in complex public health intervention studies: the need for guidance. J Epidemiol Community Health 2014, 68:101-102.
40. Bonell C, Fletcher A, Morton M, Lorenc T, Moore L: Realist randomised controlled trials: a new approach to evaluating complex public health interventions. Soc Sci Med 2012, 75:2299-2306.