Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26510493›Full record

SynthesisImplementation science : IS2015

Implementing health promotion programmes in schools: a realist systematic review of research and experience in the United Kingdom.

M Pearson, R Chilton, K Wyatt, C Abraham, T Ford, H B Woods, R Anderson

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Implementation science : IS, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 91 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
91citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

91 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Prevalence of Healthy Eating Initiatives in Australian Primary Schools: A Cross-Sectional Survey.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

31 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

M PearsonInstitute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK. Mark.Pearson@exeter.ac.uk.
R ChiltonInstitute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK. roychilton28@hotmail.com.
K WyattInstitute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK. K.M.Wyatt@exeter.ac.uk.
C AbrahamInstitute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK. C.Abraham@exeter.ac.uk.
T FordInstitute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK. T.J.Ford@exeter.ac.uk.
H B WoodsSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK. h.b.woods@sheffield.ac.uk.
R AndersonInstitute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK. R.Anderson@exeter.ac.uk.

Funding

Department of Health 10/3006/07Department of Health 10/3010/01Department of Health PB-PG-0807-14168
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSchools have long been viewed as a good setting in which to encourage healthy lifestyles amongst children, and schools in many countries aspire to more comprehensive, integrated approaches to health promotion. Recent reviews have identified evidence of the effects of school health promotion on children's and young people's health. However, understanding of how such programmes can be implemented in schools is more limited.

methodsWe conducted a realist review to identify the conditions and actions which lead to the successful implementation of health promotion programmes in schools. We used the international literature to develop programme theories which were then tested using evaluations of school health promotion programmes conducted in the United Kingdom (UK). Iterative searching and screening was conducted to identify sources and clear criteria applied for appraisal of included sources. A review advisory group comprising educational and public health practitioners, commissioners, and academics was established at the outset.

resultsIn consultation with the review advisory group, we developed four programme theories (preparing for implementation, initial implementation, embedding into routine practice, adaptation and evolution); these were then refined using the UK evaluations in the review. This enabled us to identify transferable mechanisms and enabling and constraining contexts and investigate how the operation of mechanisms differed in different contexts. We also identified steps that should be taken at a senior level in relation to preparing for implementation (which revolved around negotiation about programme delivery) and initial implementation (which centred on facilitation, support, and reciprocity-the latter for both programme deliverers and pupils). However, the depth and rigour of evidence concerning embedding into routine practice and adaptation and evolution was limited.

conclusionsOur findings provide guidance for the design, implementation, and evaluation of health promotion in schools and identify the areas where further research is needed.

Indexed as

ChildHealth PromotionHumansProgram DevelopmentProgram EvaluationSchool Health ServicesUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID26510493
PMCPMC4625879

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.