ArticleBMC health services research2020
Perspectives on program mis-implementation among U.S. local public health departments.
Article in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
- Understanding multi-level policy implementation in the national school lunch and breakfast programs: a mixed-methods and agent-based modeling protocol.Implementation science communications · 2025Article
- Implementing group care in Dutch and Surinamese maternity and child care services: the vital importance of addressing outer context barriers.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Enhancing Impact: A Call to Action for Equitable Implementation Science.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2024Article
- Understanding Misimplementation in U.S. State Health Departments: An Agent-Based Model.American journal of preventive medicine · 2023Article
- Methodological approaches to study context in intervention implementation studies: an evidence gap map.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Article
- Leading the way: competencies of leadership to prevent mis-implementation of public health programs.Health education research · 2022Article
- "It's good to feel like you're doing something": a qualitative study examining state health department employees' views on why ineffective programs continue to be implemented in the USA.Implementation science communications · 2022Article
- Understanding dynamic complexity in context-Enriching contextual analysis in implementation science from a constructivist perspective.Frontiers in health services · 2022Article
- Patterns and correlates of mis-implementation in state chronic disease public health practice in the United States.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Approaches for Ending Ineffective Programs: Strategies From State Public Health Practitioners.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPublic health resources are limited and best used for effective programs. This study explores associations of mis-implementation in public health (ending effective programs or continuing ineffective programs) with organizational supports for evidence-based decision making among U.S. local health departments.
methodsThe national U.S. sample for this cross-sectional study was stratified by local health department jurisdiction population size. One person was invited from each randomly selected local health department: the leader in chronic disease, or the director. Of 600 selected, 579 had valid email addresses; 376 completed the survey (64.9% response). Survey items assessed frequency of and reasons for mis-implementation. Participants indicated agreement with statements on organizational supports for evidence-based decision making (7-point Likert).
resultsThirty percent (30.0%) reported programs often or always ended that should have continued (inappropriate termination); organizational supports for evidence-based decision making were not associated with the frequency of programs ending. The main reason given for inappropriate termination was grant funding ended (86.0%). Fewer (16.4%) reported programs often or always continued that should have ended (inappropriate continuation). Higher perceived organizational supports for evidence-based decision making were associated with less frequent inappropriate continuation (odds ratio = 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.79, 0.94). All organizational support factors were negatively associated with inappropriate continuation. Top reasons were sustained funding (55.6%) and support from policymakers (34.0%).
conclusionsOrganizational supports for evidence-based decision making may help local health departments avoid continuing programs that should end. Creative mechanisms of support are needed to avoid inappropriate termination. Understanding what influences mis-implementation can help identify supports for de-implementation of ineffective programs so resources can go towards evidence-based programs.
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.