Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38416383›Full record

ArticlePrevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research2024

A Mixed Methods Examination of Decision-Making During Program Exploration and Implementation in Schools.

Courtenay A Barrett, Dustin J Sleesman, Tazkira Amin

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Courtenay A BarrettMichigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA. morsicou@msu.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-9258-4725
Dustin J SleesmanUniversity of Delaware, Newark, DE, 19716, USA.
Tazkira AminMichigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Schools are a critical setting to promote healthy youth development through the provision of evidence-based programs (EBPs), yet preventive EBPs in schools are underutilized. The Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework highlights numerous factors that may influence program adoption during the Exploration phase and progress monitoring during the Implementation phase. However, no research has systematically and simultaneously identified the factors that influence school administrators' decision-making during these important processes. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 24 school administrators in the Midwestern region of the U.S. to understand how they weigh various considerations that inform their adoption and progress monitoring of prevention programs. Results indicated that school administrators consider five separate factors during the adoption decision, prioritized in the following order: need for the program, school community buy-in, contextual fit, resources, and program characteristics (including the evidence-base). Further, administrators consider five indicators to monitor program performance, prioritized as follows: intervention fidelity, quantitative and qualitative data that determine if the identified need was met, school community buy-in, resource consumption, and program characteristics. Implications for prevention scientists and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Indexed as

Decision MakingAdolescentEvidence-Based PracticeFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMidwestern United StatesProgram DevelopmentProgram EvaluationSchool Health ServicesSchoolsAdoptionDecision-makingEPISImplementation scienceProgress monitoringSchool administrators

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.