Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34975744›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2021

Protocol for an Effectiveness-Implementation Hybrid Trial to Evaluate Scale up of an Evidence-Based Intervention Addressing Lifestyle Behaviours From the Start of Life: INFANT.

Rachel Laws, Penelope Love, Kylie D Hesketh, Harriet Koorts, Elizabeth Denney-Wilson, Marj Moodie, Vicki Brown, Kok-Leong Ong, Jennifer Browne, Sarah Marshall and 3 more

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Supporting Decision Making in Early Years Initiatives: Co-Designing a Child Health Evidence Dashboard.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Tensions and Paradoxes of Scaling Up: A Critical Reflection on Physical Activity Promotion.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

13 authors.

Rachel LawsInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Science, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Penelope LoveInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Science, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Kylie D HeskethInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Science, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Harriet KoortsInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Science, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Elizabeth Denney-WilsonSydney Nursing School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney and Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Marj MoodieDeakin Health Economics, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Vicki BrownDeakin Health Economics, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Kok-Leong OngLa Trobe Analytics Lab, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Jennifer BrowneInstitute for Health Transformation, School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Sarah MarshallInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Science, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Sandrine LioretUniversité de Paris, CRESS, INSERM, INRAE, Paris, France.
Liliana OrellanaBiostatistics Unit, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Karen J CampbellInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Science, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Promoting healthy eating and active play in early life is critical, however few interventions have been delivered or sustained at scale. The evaluation of interventions at scale is a crucial, yet under-researched aspect of modifying population-level health behaviours. INFANT is an evidence-based early childhood healthy lifestyle intervention that aims to improve parents' knowledge and skills around promoting optimal energy balance-related behaviours that, in turn, influence children's diet, activity and adiposity. It consists of: 1) Four group sessions delivered via first time parent groups across the first 12 months of life; 2) access to the My Baby Now app from birth to 18 months of age. This research aims to assess real-world implementation, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of INFANT when delivered at scale across Victoria, Australia. Methods and Analysis: A hybrid type II implementation-effectiveness trial applying a mixed methods design will be conducted. INFANT will be implemented in collaboration with practice and policy partners including maternal and child health services, population health and Aboriginal health, targeting all local government areas (n=79) in Victoria, Australia. Evaluation is based on criteria from the 'Outcomes for Implementation Research' and 'RE-AIM' frameworks. Implementation outcomes will be assessed using descriptive quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews with those involved in implementation, and include intervention reach, organisational acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, cost, feasibility, penetration and sustainability. Process measures include organizational readiness, fidelity, and adaptation. Effectiveness outcomes will be assessed using a sample of INFANT participants and a non-randomized comparison group receiving usual care (1,500 infants in each group), recruited within the same communities. Eligible participants will be first time primary caregivers of an infant aged 0-3 months, owning a personal mobile phone and able to communicate in English. Effectiveness outcomes include infant lifestyle behaviours and BMIz at 12 and 18 months of age. Impact: This is the first known study to evaluate the scale up of an evidence based early childhood obesity prevention intervention under real world conditions. This study has the potential to provide generalisable implementation, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness evidence to inform the future scale up of public health interventions both in Australia and internationally. Clinical Trial Registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry https://www.anzctr.org.au/, identifier ACTRN12620000670976.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisDiet, HealthyEvidence-Based MedicineExerciseHealthy LifestyleFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHealth Plan ImplementationHealth PromotionHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleParentsPediatric ObesityPrognosischild obesity preventionimplementation scienceinfants (birth to 2 years)nutritionobesityphysical activityscaling upsedentary behavior

Identifiers

PMID34975744
PMCPMC8715861

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.