Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32631324›Full record

Trial reportBMC medical research methodology2020

The value of social practice theory for implementation science: learning from a theory-based mixed methods process evaluation of a randomised controlled trial.

Julia Frost, Jennifer Wingham, Nicky Britten, Colin Greaves, Charles Abraham, Fiona C Warren, Hasnain Dalal, Rod S Taylor

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC medical research methodology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Julia FrostInstitute of Health Research, University of Exeter College of Medicine and Health, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, Devon, EX1 2LU, UK. J.Frost@exeter.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-3503-5911
Jennifer WinghamPrimary Care Research Group, University of Exeter College of Medicine and Health, Exeter, Devon, EX1 2LU, UK.
Nicky BrittenInstitute of Health Research, University of Exeter College of Medicine and Health University of Exeter, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
Colin GreavesPsychology Applied to Health, School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Charles AbrahamSchool of Psychological Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, School of Psychological Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, 3010, Australia.
Fiona C WarrenMedical Statistics, Exeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care, University of Exeter College of Medicine and Health, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, Devon, EX1 2LU, UK.
Hasnain DalalUniversity of Exeter College of Medicine and Health (Truro Campus), Knowledge Spa, Royal Cornwall Hospital, Truro, TR1 3HD, UK.
Rod S TaylorHealth Services Research, Institute of Health Research, University of Exeter College of Medicine and Health, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, Devon, EX1 2LU, UK.
University of Exeter · GBThe University of Melbourne · AUUniversity of Birmingham · GB

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-1210-12004Programme Grants for Applied Research RP-PG-1210-12004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough there is trial evidence that complex interventions are effective for the self-management of heart failure, little evidence supports their effectiveness in routine practice. We used Social Practice Theory to guide a Type 1 Hybrid Trial: a mixed methods process evaluation of a complex intervention for heart failure. The objective of this paper is to explore the value of Social Practice Theory for implementation science.

methodsSocial Practice Theory informed a mixed methods process evaluation of a multi-centre randomised controlled trial of a 12 week home-based intervention to optimise self-care support for people with heart failure and their caregivers - Rehabilitation EnAblement in Chronic Heart Failure (REACH-HF). Interviews were conducted with 19 people with heart failure and 17 caregivers at 4 months and 12 months after recruitment into the trial. Cases were constructed at the level of the individual, couple, facilitator and centre; and included multi-modal process and outcome data. Evaluative coding and subsequent within- and cross-case analyses enabled the development of a typology of relationships linking fidelity of intervention delivery and tailoring of content to individual needs and concerns. Social Practice Theory was used to interrogate the relationships between elements of the intervention and their implementation.

resultsOf 216 trial participants, 107 were randomised to the intervention (REACH-HF plus usual care). The intervention was most effective when fidelity was high and delivery was tailored to the individual's needs, but less effective when both tailoring and fidelity were low. Theory-based analysis enabled us to model complex relationships between intervention elements (competencies, materials and meanings) and social context. The findings illustrate how intervention fidelity and tailoring are contextual and how the effectiveness of the REACH-HF intervention depended on both optimal alignment and implementation of these elements.

conclusionThe study demonstrates the utility of theory-based analysis which integrates data from multiple sources to highlight contexts and circumstances in which interventions work best. Social Practice Theory provides a framework for guiding and analysing the processes by which a complex intervention is evaluated in a clinical trial, and has the potential to guide context-specific implementation strategies for clinical practice.

trial registrationISRCTN, IISRCTN86234930 . Registered 13th November 2014.

Indexed as

Heart FailureImplementation ScienceCaregiversChronic DiseaseHumansSelf CareBehaviour changeContextFidelityHeart failureImplementation scienceProcess evaluationRandomised controlled trialSocial theoryTailoring

Identifiers

PMID32631324
PMCPMC7336630
OpenAlexW3037269828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.