Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30891851›Full record

ArticleJournal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association2019

Facilitators and barriers to a dietitian-implemented blended care weight-loss intervention (SMARTsize): a qualitative study.

W H Heideman, F C Rongen, C Bolleurs, E Govers, W Kroeze, I H M Steenhuis

Open access · bronzeAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Facilitators and barriers to a dietitian-implemented blended care weight-loss intervention (SMARTsize): a qualitative study.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2019
    Article
  4. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

W H HeidemanDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
F C RongenDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
C BolleursDutch Association of Dietitians, Houten, The Netherlands.
E GoversAmstelring and Dutch Knowledge Centre of Dietitians on Obesity (KDOO), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
W KroezeDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6211-3578
I H M SteenhuisDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0065-2776
Department of Health · ZAAmstelring · NLAssociation of Dutch Burn Centres · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDietitians play an important role in the intervention and prevention of being overweight and obesity. More and more blended care interventions are being implemented. The present study aimed to evaluate the delivery by Dutch dietitians of a multicomponent, evidence-based weight-loss programme (SMARTsize), including counselling for relapse prevention. The aim of this qualitative study was to identify facilitators and barriers to the delivery of SMARTsize.

methodsNine semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 dietitians who participated in a larger implementation study. Each interview was recorded and transcribed verbatim. Determinants of theory of implementation, including characteristics of the user, the innovation, organisational context and setting, and innovation strategy guided interviews and analysis. Data were coded and analysed using the framework approach.

resultsAccording to dietitians, the SMARTsize intervention had a positive influence on patients. The main implementation facilitators were the availability of implementation materials, such as a manual, training in relapse prevention and social support from other dietitians. The main barriers to implementation were organisation and financial reimbursement of cooking classes, the belief that patients need more individual counselling in the starting phase, and the unsuitability for people with low levels of health literacy.

conclusionsMost dietitians considered that implementation of the SMARTsize intervention consisting of e-health, written information and cooking classes and face-to-face counselling is challenging but feasible. Further development of the SMARTsize intervention and implementation tools is needed to lower experienced barriers. It is also recommended that a version of the intervention to be developed that is suitable for patients with lower levels of health literacy.

Indexed as

Health Plan ImplementationAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelCounselingDelivery of Health Care, IntegratedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsNutritionistsOverweightProgram EvaluationQualitative ResearchWeight Reduction Programsimplementationmulti-component interventionqualitativeSMARTsizeweight loss

Identifiers

PMID30891851
PMCPMC6593710
OpenAlexW2924893745

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.