Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39223687›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2024

Using mixed methods and partnership to develop a program evaluation toolkit for organizations that provide physical activity programs for persons with disabilities.

Sarah V C Lawrason, Pinder DaSilva, Emilie Michalovic, Amy Latimer-Cheung, Jennifer R Tomasone, Shane Sweet, Tanya Forneris, Jennifer Leo, Matthew Greenwood, Janine Giles and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

15 authors.

Sarah V C LawrasonSchool of Health and Exercise Sciences, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada. svcl11@mail.ubc.ca.
Pinder DaSilvaAbilities Centre, Whitby, ON, Canada.
Emilie MichalovicAbilities Centre, Whitby, ON, Canada.
Amy Latimer-CheungSchool of Kinesiology and Health Studies, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Jennifer R TomasoneSchool of Kinesiology and Health Studies, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Shane SweetDepartment of Kinesiology and Physical Education, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Tanya FornerisSchool of Health and Exercise Sciences, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada.
Jennifer LeoThe Steadward Centre for Personal and Physical Achievement, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Matthew GreenwoodPickering Football Club, Pickering, ON, Canada.
Janine GilesRocky Mountain Adaptive, Canmore, AB, Canada.
Jane ArkellActive Living Alliance, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Jackie PatatasBC Wheelchair Sports Association, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Nick BoyleRocky Mountain Adaptive, Canmore, AB, Canada.
Nathan AdamsSchool of Health and Exercise Sciences, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada.
Kathleen A Martin GinisSchool of Health and Exercise Sciences, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada.

Funding

Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Connection Grant
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purpose of this paper is to report on the process for developing an online RE-AIM evaluation toolkit in partnership with organizations that provide physical activity programming for persons with disabilities.

methodsA community-university partnership was established and guided by an integrated knowledge translation approach. The four-step development process included: (1) identify, review, and select knowledge (literature review and two rounds of Delphi consensus-building), (2) adapt knowledge to local context (rating feasibility of outcomes and integration into online platform), (3) assess barriers and facilitators (think-aloud interviews), and (4) select, tailor, implement (collaborative dissemination plan).

resultsStep 1: Fifteen RE-AIM papers relevant to community programming were identified during the literature review. Two rounds of Delphi refined indicators for the toolkit related to reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance. Step 2: At least one measure was linked with each indicator. Ten research and community partners participated in assessing the feasibility of measures, resulting in a total of 85 measures. Step 3: Interviews resulted in several recommendations for the online platform and toolkit. Step 4: Project partners developed a dissemination plan, including an information package, webinars, and publications. DISCUSSION: This project demonstrates that community and university partners can collaborate to develop a useful, evidence-informed evaluation resource for both audiences. We identified several strategies for partnership when creating a toolkit, including using a set of expectations, engaging research users from the outset, using consensus methods, recruiting users through networks, and mentorship of trainees. The toolkit can be found at et.cdpp.ca. Next steps include disseminating (e.g., through webinars, conferences) and evaluating the toolkit to improve its use for diverse contexts (e.g., universal PA programming).

Indexed as

Delphi techniqueImplementation scienceKnowledge translation

Identifiers

PMID39223687
PMCPMC11367884

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.