Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36418997›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2022

What factors influence implementation of whole-school interventions aiming to promote student commitment to school to prevent substance use and violence? Systematic review and synthesis of process evaluations.

Ruth Ponsford, Jane Falconer, G J Melendez-Torres, Chris Bonell

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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.

Ruth PonsfordDepartment of Public Health, Environments and Society, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, WC1H 9SH, London, UK.
Jane FalconerLibrary and Archives Services, Department of Medical Statistics, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, WC1E 7HT, London, UK.
G J Melendez-TorresCollege of Medicine and Health, South Cloisters, University of Exeter, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, EX1 2LU, Exeter, UK.
Chris BonellDepartment of Public Health, Environments and Society, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, WC1H 9SH, London, UK. chris.bonell@lshtm.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhole-school interventions go beyond classroom health education to modify the school environment to promote health. A sub-set aim to promote student commitment to school to reduce substance use and violence (outcomes associated with low commitment). It is unclear what factors influence implementation of such interventions.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review including synthesis of evidence from process evaluations examining what factors affect implementation. Meta-ethnographic synthesis was informed by May's General Theory of Implementation.

resultsSixteen reports, covering 13 studies and 10 interventions were included in our synthesis. In terms of May's concept of 'sense-making', we found that school staff were more likely to understand what was required in implementing an intervention when provided with good-quality materials and support. Staff could sometimes wilfully or unintentionally misinterpret interventions. In terms of May's concept of 'cognitive participation', whereby staff commit to implementation, we found that lack of intervention adaptability could in particular undermine implementation of whole-school elements. Interventions providing local data were reported as helping build staff commitment. School leaders were more likely to commit to an intervention addressing an issue they already intended to tackle. Collaborative planning groups were reported as useful in ensuring staff 'collective action' (May's term for working together) to enact interventions. Collective action was also promoted by the presence of sufficient time, leadership and relationships. Implementation of whole-school interventions took time to build. Considering May's concept of 'reflexive monitoring' (formal or informal review of progress), this was important in assessing and enhancing implementation. 'Quick wins' could help maintain collective impetus to implement further intervention activities.

conclusionWe identified novel factors influencing implementation of whole-school elements such as: local adaptability of interventions; providing local data to build commitment; interventions addressing an issue already on school leaders' agenda; collaborative planning groups; and 'reflexive monitoring' as an explicit intervention component.

Indexed as

Health PromotionSubstance-Related DisordersHumansSchoolsStudentsViolenceProcess evaluationSchool environmentSubstance useSystematic reviewViolenceWhole-school interventions

Identifiers

PMID36418997
PMCPMC9682645

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.