ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2022
Enabling local political committees to support the implementation of evidence-based practice - a feasibility study.
Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLocal politicians can serve as enablers or barriers for health and social organizations to implement evidence, impacting the context of health and social service organizations. Increasing local politicians' knowledge about, and support for, evidence-based practice (EBP) could be a way to strengthen the conditions in social service organizations for EBP. The aim of the study was to describe the development and assess the perceived feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of an intervention to enable local political committees to support the implementation of EBP. Furthermore, the achievement of the learning outcomes was examined.
methodsWorkshops and interviews were used to co-create the intervention with social service representatives (n = 8) and local politicians (n = 6). A single-arm, non-blinded feasibility study was conducted in a social welfare committee with local politicians (n = 14) and representatives from social services (n = 4). Interviews and pre-post questionnaires were used to assess the intervention's feasibility, acceptability, appropriateness, and learning outcomes. Progression criteria was set to > 80% of respondents judging the intervention to be feasible, acceptable, and appropriate. Thematic analysis and descriptive statistics were used for analysis.
resultsThe quantitative and qualitative results indicate that the intervention was perceived as acceptable and appropriate. However, the progression criteria for feasibility were not fully met. Qualitative findings show that the intervention was perceived as interesting, fun, and created curiosity to learn more about EBP. The discussions between the committee and the representatives from the social services department were much valued.
conclusionsCareful anchoring of the intervention and comprehensive local adaptation regarding delivery format will be central to the delivery of this intervention if offered elsewhere. Furthermore, we recommend that skills training during the intervention should be included. The collaboration between local politicians and representatives from the social services department was a vital aspect of the intervention and should not be excluded. Collaboration between these actors will be of significance in further developing support for EBP implementation, as expressed by the interview participants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.