ArticleDiscover public health2025
Processes of development related with the implementation of the Icelandic prevention model in a rural Canadian community.
Article in Discover public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A mixed methods exploration of the lifestyle drift concept to support the development of measurement tools.Discover public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Icelandic Prevention Model (IPM) is a sequential 10-step community-driven collaborative intervention that is designed to support the prevention of substance use in youth by establishing healthy developmental contexts. The IPM has been implemented across Iceland for over 20 years and is now being implemented in other countries. Recognizing the need to explore how to adapt the IPM to new contexts and document the implementation of the model, this paper describes a process evaluation of the first three steps of the IPM within a Canadian rural community to capture experiences during the early development. Specifically, this study addresses the following research questions: (1) What are the processes of development and contextual features that influence the implementation of the IPM within Lanark County, Ontario? and (2) What adaptations are needed to successfully implement the IPM in Canada? Semi-structured interviews were conducted to examine experiences and lessons learned through the implementation of the model. Thematic analyses were completed using QSR NVivo. A deductive and inductive approach was applied, whereby some interview guide questions were derived from the IPM implementation steps and others were more exploratory, examining context and processes of development. Nine interviews were conducted with key partners who were leading the implementation of the IPM. Themes highlighting cultural factors that influence implementation, processes of development related to community engagement, and themes relating to youth participation, fidelity issues, fundraising, health equity and challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic were identified. This paper contributes new scientific knowledge related to implementation processes within upstream prevention of substance use and practical information that is useful for communities interested in implementing the IPM.
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.