ArticleBMJ open2017
Engaging stakeholders and target groups in prioritising a public health intervention: the Creating Active School Environments (CASE) online Delphi study.
Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Exploring Sustainability in the Era of Differentiated HIV Service Delivery in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Review.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2021Pooled it
- 'It just wasn't going to be heard': A mixed methods study to compare different ways of involving people with diabetes and health-care professionals in health intervention research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020Trial
- Introducing physically active lessons in UK secondary schools: feasibility study and pilot cluster-randomised controlled trial.BMJ open · 2019Trial
- School-based intervention to improve mental health, cognitive function, and academic performance in adolescents: a study protocol for a cluster randomised trial.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Identifying local priorities for research with linked routine data: an online workshop method.International journal of population data science · 2026Article
- The involvement of stakeholders in computational model development to support decision-making in public health: a scoping review.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Improving shared decision-making in bronchiectasis.BMJ open respiratory research · 2025Review
- A Formative Evaluation of Interventions to Enhance Clinical Trial Diversity Guided by the Socioecological Model.Cancers · 2025Article
- Stakeholder perspectives of an experiential learning program at a children's museum to promote healthy eating and physical activity.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Development of health information materials on antimicrobial resistance with lay workers in Grahamstown/Makhanda, South Africa.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- "Physical Activity Is Not the Answer to Everything, but It Is to a Lot": Stakeholders' Perceived Determinants of Implementing Physical Activity Interventions for Older Adults.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- A Structured Approach to Involve Stakeholders in Prioritising Topics for Systematic Reviews in Public Health.International journal of public health · 2024Article
- Exploring knowledge gaps and research needs in respiratory therapy: a qualitative description study.Canadian journal of respiratory therapy : CJRT = Revue canadienne de la therapie respiratoire : RCTR · 2024Article
- Identifying Research Priorities to Promote the Well-Being of Family Caregivers of Canadians with Intellectual and/or Developmental Disabilities: A Pilot Delphi Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Involving adolescents in the design, implementation, evaluation and dissemination of health research: an umbrella review protocol.BMJ open · 2023Article
- How do we best engage young people in decision-making about their health? A scoping review of deliberative priority setting methods.International journal for equity in health · 2023Article
- Cataract services for all: Strategies for equitable access from a global modified Delphi process.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Article
- Prioritising child health and maternity evidence-based interventions or service models: a stakeholder-driven process.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- What and how do different stakeholders contribute to intervention development? A mixed methods study.HRB open research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesStakeholder engagement and public involvement are considered as integral to developing effective public health interventions and is encouraged across all phases of the research cycle. However, limited guidelines and appropriate tools exist to facilitate stakeholder engagement-especially during the intervention prioritisation phase. We present the findings of an online 'Delphi' study that engaged stakeholders (including young people) in the process of prioritising secondary school environment-focused interventions that aim to increase physical activity.
settingWeb-based data collection using an online Delphi tool enabling participation of geographically diverse stakeholders.
participants37 stakeholders participated, including young people (age 13-16 years), parents, teachers, public health practitioners, academics and commissioners; 33 participants completed both rounds. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants were asked to prioritise a (short-listed) selection of school environment-focused interventions (eg, standing desks, outdoor design changes) based on the criteria of 'reach', 'equality', 'acceptability', 'feasibility', 'effectiveness' and 'cost'. Participants were also asked to rank the criteria and the effectiveness outcomes (eg, physical activity, academic achievement, school enjoyment) from most to least important. Following feedback along with any new information provided, participants completed round 2 4 weeks later.
resultsThe intervention prioritisation process was feasible to conduct and comments from participants indicated satisfaction with the process. Consensus regarding intervention strategies was achieved among the varied groups of stakeholders, with 'active lessons' being the favoured approach. Participants ranked 'mental health and well-being' as the most important outcome followed by 'enjoyment of school'. The most important criteria was 'effectiveness', followed by 'feasibility'.
conclusionsThis novel approach to engaging a wide variety of stakeholders in the research process was feasible to conduct and acceptable to participants. It also provided insightful information relating to how stakeholders prioritise interventions. The approach could be extended beyond the specific project to be a useful tool for researchers and practitioners.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.