Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34246031›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2021

Walking the talk on multi-level interventions: The power of parsimony.

Colleen M McBride, Hannah Lf Cooper, David R Williams, Karen M Emmons

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Evaluating fertility preservation interventions for alignment with ASCO Guidelines for reproductive aged women undergoing cancer treatment: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. One Health: An epistemological genealogy.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

4 authors.

Colleen M McBrideDepartment of Behavioral, Social and Health Education Sciences, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA. Electronic address: cmmcbri@emory.edu.
Hannah Lf CooperDepartment of Behavioral, Social and Health Education Sciences, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
David R WilliamsSocial and Behavioral Sciences Department, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Karen M EmmonsSocial and Behavioral Sciences Department, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

The Implementation Science Center for Cancer Control Equity - Research ProgramP50CA244433 · NCI · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI EMMONS, KAREN M., TAVERAS BENAVIDEZ, ELSIE MIREYA · 2019 to 2023
$12.5M
Testing a Low Cost Population- and Theory-Based Outreach Intervention to Engage Ovarian Cancer Survivors and their Close Relatives to Consider Genetic ServicesU01CA240581 · NCI · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI GUAN, YUE · 2020 to 2023
$2.6M
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA244433NCI NIH HHS U01 CA240581
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is strong consensus regarding the need for multi-level interventions (MLIs) to address today's complex health problems. Several longstanding social ecological frameworks are commonly referred to in guiding MLI development. The specificity and comprehensiveness of these frameworks unwittingly suggest that the totality of included influences are important in all health contexts. Not surprisingly, when viewed as requiring intervention at all levels of influence, MLIs are often considered to be infeasible due to sizeable cost and logistical barriers. Thus, efforts to develop and evaluate MLIs have been extremely limited, and comparatively few examples are found in the health literature. We argue that operational frameworks to identify which levels matter in which contexts - henceforth, referred to as parsimony - could accelerate the field towards broader use of MLIs. We suggest a hypothetical operational framework informed by complexity theory and pragmatic approaches that could enable us to conceptualize, design and evaluate MLIs to consider where reflexive and recursive process mechanisms that cross levels should be targeted by MLI. The approach also emphasizes sustainability of MLIs. Without developing parsimony-based operational frameworks to move us forward, we fear that little will change, and we will simply continue to talk, without proceeding to the walk.

Indexed as

DisparitiesFrameworkInterventionsLevels of influence

Identifiers

PMID34246031
PMCPMC9310694

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.