Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40290646›Full record

ArticleImplementation research and practice

Evaluating professionals' adaptations before and after a decision support intervention "the Adaptation and Fidelity Tool" (A-FiT)-A longitudinal within-person intervention design.

Johanna Zetterlund, Henna Hasson, Ulrica von Thiele Schwarz, Margit Neher, Emmie Wahlström

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation research and practice. 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. Modifications of a Parenting Program in the Context of Scaling-Up and Scaling-Out: Documenting Furaha Teens in Tanzania Using FRAME.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2025
    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

5 authors.

Johanna ZetterlundDepartment of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University, Västerås, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4116-213X
Henna HassonDepartment of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3827-6841
Ulrica von Thiele SchwarzDepartment of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University, Västerås, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4771-8349
Margit NeherDepartment of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2764-3722
Emmie WahlströmDepartment of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University, Västerås, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7828-6999

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Implementing evidence-based interventions (EBIs) in practice requires balancing fidelity and adaptation to suit new contexts. Careful considerations are needed to maintain the core elements for effectiveness while ensuring fit with new contexts. The Adaptation and Fidelity Tool (A-FiT) intervention addresses this challenge by providing support for professionals using EBIs in the sustainment phase of implementation. This study evaluates the A-FiT intervention and examines how professionals delivering an EBI manage fidelity and adaptation during the sustainment phase of implementation, before and after the intervention. Method Short, structured interviews were repeatedly conducted with 14 professionals delivering an EBI ( Results: The professionals made about the same number of adaptations before and after the A-FiT intervention. However, after the intervention, significant changes in the type and intentionality of the adaptations were observed. Changes in type consisted of fewer "removing," "substituting," and "integrating another framework" adaptations and more "loosening structure" and "departing from the intervention" adaptations. Regarding intentionality, fewer planned adaptations with the intention of improving the EBI effects were made, while adaptations made for practical reasons, both planned and unplanned, increased after the A-FiT intervention. No statistical change was found regarding fidelity consistency. Conclusions: The findings indicate increased awareness about fidelity and adaptation among the group leaders, resulting in fewer planned adaptations to enhance program effects and more practical adaptations to address context challenges. The A-FiT intervention appears to help professionals in their management of fidelity and adaptations when delivering EBIs. The study underscores the importance of understanding adaptations in their context, purpose, and impact (intended and unintended) on the outcome/value.

Indexed as

adaptationdecision makingevaluationevidence-basedimplementationimplementation supportspractice contextsustainmenttreatment adherencetreatment fidelityuse of evidence

Identifiers

PMID40290646
PMCPMC12033404

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.