Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27896504›Full record

ArticleJournal of community health2017

Essential Resources for Implementation and Sustainability of Evidence-Based Health Promotion Programs: A Mixed Methods Multi-Site Case Study.

M Dattalo, M Wise, J H Ford Ii, B Abramson, J Mahoney

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of community health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Reasons Behind Preferences for Community-Based Continence Promotion.Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery · 2020
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

5 authors.

M DattaloGeriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC), William S. Middleton Memorial VA Hospital, 2500 Overlook Terrace, 11G, Madison, WI, 53705, USA. mdattalo@uwhealth.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7769-5224
M WiseSonderegger Research Center, School of Pharmacy, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, 53705, USA.
J H Ford IiCenter for Health Systems Research and Analysis, College of Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, 53726, USA.
B AbramsonWisconsin Institute for Healthy Aging, Madison, WI, 53714, USA.
J MahoneyDivision of Geriatrics and Gerontology, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, 53705, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As of October 2016, use of federal Older Americans Act funds for health promotion and disease prevention will be restricted to the Administration on Aging's criteria for high-level evidence-based health promotion programs. Dissemination of these programs to rural communities remains limited. Therefore a strong need exists to identify strategies that facilitate program implementation and sustainability. The objective of this study was to compare organizational readiness and implementation strategies used by rural communities that achieved varying levels of success in sustaining evidence-based health promotion programs for older adults. We utilized a qualitative multi-site case study design to analyze the longitudinal experiences of eight rural sites working to implement evidence-based health promotion program over 3 years (8/2012-7/2015). Multiple sources of data (interviews, documents, reports, surveys) from each site informed the analysis. We used conventional content analysis to conduct a cross-case comparison to identify common features of rural counties that successfully implemented and sustained their target evidence-based health promotion program. Readiness to implement evidence-based programs as low at baseline as all site leaders described needing to secure additional resources for program implementation. Sites that successfully utilized six essential resources implemented and sustained greater numbers of workshops: (1) External Partnerships, (2) Agency Leadership Commitment, (3) Ongoing Source of Workshop Leaders, (4) Health Promotion Coordination Tasks Assigned to Specific Staff, (5) Organizational Stability, and (6) Change Team Engagement. The six essential resources described in this study can help rural communities assess their readiness to implement health promotion programs and work secure the resources necessary for successful implementation.

Indexed as

AgedEducationEvidence-Based PracticeHealth PromotionHumansLocal GovernmentLongitudinal StudiesOrganizational Case StudiesProgram DevelopmentProgram EvaluationWisconsinAging service networkFall preventionHealth promotionOrganizational readinessRural healthSustainability

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.