Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32865660›Full record

Trial reportPrevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research2020

Qualitative Process Evaluation of Rural Schools: Uptake of Change Processes and Contextual Factors Influencing Implementation Within a Primary Prevention Program for Youth.

Jamie Yoder, Anne Williford, Lilyana Ortega, Dorothy L Espelage, Scott LoMurray, Daniel Ruiz, Natalie Kennedy

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Jamie YoderSchool of Social Work, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Anne WillifordSchool of Social Work, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA. anne.williford@colostate.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-7680-1769
Lilyana OrtegaDepartment of Human Development and Family Studies, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Dorothy L EspelageSchool of Education, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Scott LoMurraySources of Strength, Lakewood, CO, USA.
Daniel RuizSchool of Social Work, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Natalie KennedySchool of Social Work, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA.

Funding

CDC HHS 1 U01 CE002841
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sexual violence (SV), homophobic name-calling, and bullying commonly occur in school settings. As such, comprehensive school-based violence prevention strategies are needed. Recent calls in prevention science argue that investigations of preventive interventions must move beyond simply testing if programs work; rather, they must also examine how interventions work. The purpose of this study was to explore the differential uptake of salient change mechanisms of a school-based primary prevention program, Sources of Strength (Sources) in rural schools, and examine contextual factors that may influence implementation outcomes in rural contexts. As a supplement to a randomized controlled trial of Sources in 20 high schools in Colorado, the present project utilized a rigorous qualitative design to conduct staff focus groups and student interviews within four schools (two intervention and two waitlist schools) that participated in the RCT. Results suggest variability in uptake of Sources key processes (expansion of networks to build connections, school-wide activities, and staff support) in intervention schools. While these were indicated as non-formalized processes in waitlist schools, there was also variability in these reports. Furthermore, results revealed specific contextual factors including cultural norms, degree of rurality, and school-level buy-in/investment that impacted implementation outcomes for intervention and waitlist schools (e.g., pre-implementation readiness). Implications are discussed around alignment of a school's policies, procedures, and values with the preventative intervention in effort to support strong implementation.

Indexed as

BullyingProgram EvaluationSchoolsAdolescentColoradoHumansPrimary PreventionRural PopulationSchool Health ServicesViolenceHigh school–aged youthQualitative process evaluationViolence prevention programming

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.