Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35033154›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2022

Scale-up of prevention programmes: sustained state-wide use of programme delivery software is explained by normalised self-organised adoption and non-adoption.

Eileen Goldberg, Kathleen Conte, Victoria Loblay, Sisse Groen, Lina Persson, Christine Innes-Hughes, Jo Mitchell, Andrew Milat, Mandy Williams, Amanda Green and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science : IS, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Eileen GoldbergSax Institute, Sydney, Australia.
Kathleen ConteMenzies Centre for Health Policy and Economics, University of Sydney, D17, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Victoria LoblayMenzies Centre for Health Policy and Economics, University of Sydney, D17, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Sisse GroenUniversity of Southern Denmark, Esbjerg, Denmark.
Lina PerssonNew South Wales Ministry of Health, Sydney, Australia.
Christine Innes-HughesNew South Wales Ministry of Health, Sydney, Australia.
Jo MitchellThe Australian Prevention Partnership Centre, Sax Institute, Sydney, Australia.
Andrew MilatNew South Wales Ministry of Health, Sydney, Australia.
Mandy WilliamsSouth Western Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia.
Amanda GreenNew South Wales Ministry of Health, Sydney, Australia.
Penelope HaweMenzies Centre for Health Policy and Economics, University of Sydney, D17, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia. penny.hawe@sydney.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0003-2397-867X
New South Wales Department of Health · AUSax Institute · AUThe University of Sydney · AUSouth Western Sydney Local Health District · AUUniversity of Southern Denmark · DKUniversity of Technology Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPopulation-level health promotion is often conceived as a tension between "top-down" and "bottom-up" strategy and action. We report behind-the-scenes insights from Australia's largest ever investment in the "top-down" approach, the $45m state-wide scale-up of two childhood obesity programmes. We used Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) as a template to interpret the organisational embedding of the purpose-built software designed to facilitate the initiative. The use of the technology was mandatory for evaluation, i.e. for reporting the proportion of schools and childcare centres which complied with recommended health practices (the implementation targets). Additionally, the software was recommended as a device to guide the implementation process. We set out to study its use in practice.

methodsShort-term, high-intensity ethnography with all 14 programme delivery teams across New South Wales was conducted, cross-sectionally, 4 years after scale-up began. The four key mechanisms of NPT (coherence/sensemaking, cognitive participation/engagement, collective action and reflexive monitoring) were used to describe the ways the technology had normalised (embedded).

resultsSome teams and practitioners embraced how the software offered a way of working systematically with sites to encourage uptake of recommended practices, while others rejected it as a form of "mechanisation". Conscious choices had to be made at an individual and team level about the practice style offered by the technology-thus prompting personal sensemaking, re-organisation of work, awareness of choices by others and reflexivity about professional values. Local organisational arrangements allowed technology users to enter data and assist the work of non-users-collective action that legitimised opposite behaviours. Thus, the technology and the programme delivery style it represented were normalised by pathways of adoption and non-adoption. Normalised use and non-use were accepted and different choices made by local programme managers were respected. State-wide, implementation targets are being reported as met.

conclusionWe observed a form of self-organisation where individual practitioners and teams are finding their own place in a new system, consistent with complexity-based understandings of fostering scale-up in health care. Self-organisation could be facilitated with further cross-team interaction to continuously renew and revise sensemaking processes and support diverse adoption choices across different contexts.

Indexed as

Pediatric ObesityChildDelivery of Health CareHumansNew South WalesSoftwareComplexityNormalisationPractice systemPractice valuesProgramme scale-upSelf-organisation

Identifiers

PMID35033154
PMCPMC8760884
OpenAlexW4206309640

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.