Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33726864›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2021

Professionals' management of the fidelity-adaptation dilemma in the use of evidence-based interventions-an intervention study.

Ulrica von Thiele Schwarz, Fabrizia Giannotta, Margit Neher, Johanna Zetterlund, Henna Hasson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Achieving and Sustaining Standardized Measurement of Treatment Outcomes in Children With Cleft Lip/Palate: Pilot Study of a Multifaced Implementation Strategy.The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

5 authors.

Ulrica von Thiele SchwarzSchool of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University, Box 883, Västerås, Sweden. ulrica.schwarz@mdh.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4771-8349
Fabrizia GiannottaSchool of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University, Box 883, Västerås, Sweden.
Margit NeherProcome, Medical Management Centre, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
Johanna ZetterlundSchool of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University, Box 883, Västerås, Sweden.
Henna HassonProcome, Medical Management Centre, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

Vetenskapsrådet 2016-01261
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence-based interventions (EBIs) can be effective tools for the prevention of disease and health promotion. However, their implementation often requires a delicate balance between the need to adjust the intervention to the context in which it is implemented and the need to keep the core components that make the intervention effective. This so-called dilemma between fidelity and adaptation is often handled by health professionals in the sustainment phase of an implementation (i.e., once the intervention has been adopted and institutionalized in an organization), but not much is known about how and to what extent health professionals are affected by this dilemma. Focusing on the sustainment phase, this project aims to study (1) how fidelity and adaptation are managed by professionals using an EBI, (2) how the fidelity-adaptation dilemma affects professionals' psychosocial working conditions, and (3) how a structured decision support influences professionals' management of the dilemma and their psychosocial working conditions.

methodsThe study is set in Sweden, and the EBI in focus is a parental program (All Children in Focus). A longitudinal within-person intervention design is used, combined with a cross-sectional survey design. Data sources include web-based questionnaires, brief interviews, fidelity ratings, paper-and-pen questionnaires, and written documentation, collected at multiple time points with both group leaders and parents as respondents. DISCUSSION: This project approaches fidelity and adaptation from the perspective of the professionals that manage EBIs during the sustainment phase of implementation. Although it is well known that EBIs continue to change over time, it remains to be understood how the fidelity-adaptation dilemma can be managed so that the effectiveness of interventions is retained or improved, not diluted. Moreover, the project adds to the literature by presenting an occupational health perspective on the fidelity-adaptation dilemma. It is acknowledged that fidelity and adaptation may have consequences for not only clients but also the occupational wellbeing of the professionals managing the dilemma, and subsequently, their willingness and ability to deliver EBIs in a sustainable way.

Indexed as

AdaptationAdherenceDecision supportEvidence-based interventionsFidelity–adaptation dilemmaProfessionals

Identifiers

PMID33726864
PMCPMC7962232

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.