ArticleEuropean journal of cardiovascular nursing2020
Process evaluation of complex cardiovascular interventions: How to interpret the results of my trial?
Article in European journal of cardiovascular nursing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What do we want to get out of this? a critical interpretive synthesis of the value of process evaluations, with a practical planning framework.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Pooled it
- Performing lifestyle changes and reducing stroke risk: a process evaluation of a stroke prevention intervention.BMJ open · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Children's, parents', and teachers' experiences of the feasibility of a telerehabilitation intervention for children with acquired brain injury in the chronic phase - a qualitative study of acceptability and participation in the Child In Context Intervention (CICI).BMC health services research · 2023Trial
- Article
- Development and feasibility of culturally sensitive family-oriented dignity therapy for Chinese patients with lung cancer undergoing chemotherapy.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2022Article
- Implementation of a Health Promotion Practice Using Individually Targeted Lifestyle Interventions in Primary Health Care: Protocol for the "Act in Time" Mixed Methods Process Evaluation Study.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Technology Acceptance of Home-Based Cardiac Telerehabilitation Programs in Patients With Coronary Heart Disease: Systematic Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Actively incorporating lifestyle modifications into daily life: The key to adherence in a lifestyle intervention programme for metabolic syndrome.Frontiers in public health · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Complex interventions of varying degrees of complexity are commonly used and evaluated in cardiovascular nursing and allied professions. Such interventions are increasingly tested using randomized trial designs. However, process evaluations are seldom used to better understand the results of these trials. Process evaluation aims to understand how complex interventions create change by evaluating implementation, mechanisms of impact, and the surrounding context when delivering an intervention. As such, this method can illuminate important mechanisms and clarify variation in results. In this article, process evaluation is described according to the Medical Research Council guidance and its use exemplified through a randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of a transition program for adolescents with chronic conditions.
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.