ArticleThe international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity2024
Process evaluation findings from Strong Hearts, Healthy Communities 2.0: a cardiovascular disease prevention intervention for rural women.
Article in The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03059472 (Strong Hearts for New York), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
Strong Hearts for New York: A Rural Community CVD Prevention Program
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mechanisms of Strong Hearts, Healthy Communities-2.0 Effects on Weight: A Mediation Analysis.Journal of nutrition education and behavior · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Reach and representativeness within a rural randomized controlled trial designed to improve community health through civic engagement for built environment change in Texas and New York.Wellbeing, space and society · 2026Article
- Community based interventions for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in women living in rural, regional and remote areas: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Feasibility and acceptability of an adapted community-based cardiovascular disease prevention program: a pilot study of the StrongPeople strong hearts intervention for women living in urban settings.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStrong Hearts, Healthy Communities 2.0 (SHHC-2.0) was a 24-week cardiovascular disease prevention program that was effective in improving physical activity and nutrition behaviors and clinical outcomes among women in 11 rural New York, USA towns. This study evaluated the delivery of SHHC-2.0 to prepare the intervention for further dissemination.
methodsThis process evaluation was guided by the Medical Research Council recommendations and engaged program leaders and participants (i.e., women over age 40) using quantitative and qualitative methods. The quantitative evaluation included examination of enrollment and retention data, a participant survey, and a fidelity checklist completed after classes. Descriptive and comparative statistics were used to assess implementation measures: program reach, participant attendance, dose delivered, program length, perceived effectiveness, fidelity, and participant satisfaction. The qualitative evaluation included focus groups (n = 13) and interviews (n = 4) using semi-structured guides; audio was recorded and transcripts were deductively coded and analyzed using directed content analysis and iterative categorization approaches. Comparisons across towns and between intervention and waitlist control groups were explored.
resultsAverage reach within towns was 7.5% of the eligible population (range 0.7-15.7%). Average attendance was 59.8% of sessions (range 42.0-77.4%). Average dose delivered by leaders was 86.4% of curriculum components (range 73.5-95.2%). Average session length was 51.8 ± 4.8 min across 48 sessions. Leaders' perceived effectiveness rating averaged 4.1 ± 0.3 out of 5. Fidelity to curricular components was 81.8% (range 67.4-93.2%). Participants reported being "more than satisfied" with the overall program (88.8%) and the health benefits they obtained (72.9%). Qualitative analysis revealed that participants: (1) gained new knowledge and enjoyable experiences; (2) perceived improvements in their physical activity, nutrition, and/or health; (3) continued to face some barriers to physical activity and healthy eating, with those relating to social support being reduced; and (4) rated leaders and the group structure highly, with mixed opinions on the research elements.
conclusionsSHHC-2.0 had broad reach, was largely delivered as intended, and participants expressed high levels of satisfaction with the program and its health benefits. Our findings expand on best practices for implementing cardiovascular disease prevention programs in rural communities. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov #NCT03059472.
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.