ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020
Evaluating the Implementation Quality of a Social and Emotional Learning Program: A Mixed Methods Approach.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Barriers and facilitators for the implementation of preventative mental health interventions among secondary schools in high-income countries: a systematic review.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Integrated and responsive implementation support strategies: A qualitative analysis of implementation plans to advance systemic social and emotional learning.Implementation science communications · 2025Article
- Formative Evaluation of an Early Family-Centred Prevention Programme for Childhood Overweight and Obesity (FruehstArt): A Study Protocol.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Identifying high-risk groups for self-harm in adolescents using the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC): a cross-cohort comparison latent class analysis study.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2025Article
- Article
- Centering School Leaders' Expertise: Usability Evaluation of a Leadership-Focused Implementation Strategy to Support Tier 1 Programs in Schools.School mental health · 2024Article
- Mindfulness's moderating role applied on online SEL education.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- A scoping review of the implementation and cultural adaptation of school-based mental health promotion and prevention interventions in low-and middle-income countries.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2024Article
- Effectiveness of Health Promotion Interventions in Primary Schools-A Mixed Methods Literature Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Positive Attitude Upper Middle School social and emotional learning program: influences of implementation quality on program outcome.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Children's Perspectives on Using Serious Games as a Complement to Promoting Their Social-Emotional Skills.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Monitoring system of implementation of the Promoting Mental Health at Schools (PROMEHS) program.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Innovations in Social and Emotional Learning Research and Practice: Building from Evidence and Applying Behavioral Insights to the Design of a Social and Emotional Learning Intervention in Northeast Nigeria.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- The Effects of Implementation Quality of a School-Based Social and Emotional Well-Being Program on Students' Outcomes.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
School-based social and emotional learning (SEL) programs have been shown to be effective in producing positive outcomes for adolescents. However, variability in implementation quality can have a negative impact on these program effects. The aim of this current study is to examine the variability in implementation quality for schools implementing the MindOut program and to identify factors that were likely to contribute to this variability. Employing a mixed methods approach, quantitative and qualitative implementation data were collected from teachers (n = 16) and students (n = 280) who participated in the MindOut program. Quantitative indicators were used to score schools' implementation quality across four dimensions (dosage, adherence/fidelity, quality of delivery and participant responsiveness), and these were averaged to determine overall level of implementation (high/low). Qualitative data identified factors that contributed to implementation quality, and factors were then analyzed in accordance with the schools' implementation level grouping. Findings indicated that variability in implementation quality existed both between and within schools. A total of eight schools were assigned as high implementers and another eight as low implementers. Influencing factors were categorized into five themes: (i) program factors, (ii) participant factors, (iii) teacher factors, (iv) school contextual factors, and (v) organizational capacity factors. Several differences between high and low implementers were found in relation to these influencing factors. The findings contribute to the evidence on implementation quality in schools by advancing knowledge on measuring implementation quality across multiple dimensions and informants successfully. These findings can also inform practitioners of the main influencing factors in schools so that strategies can be developed to optimize implementation quality in the future.
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.