ArticleMaternal & child nutrition2025
Reaching Priority Populations When Scaling Up: A Qualitative Study of Practitioners' Experiences of Implementing Early Childhood Health Interventions in Victoria, Australia.
Article in Maternal & child nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Implementing evidence-based health promotion programmes at scale is important for achieving population-level health outcomes. However, achieving equitable reach can be challenging. An evidence-based early-life nutrition and movement intervention (INFANT) is currently being implemented at scale in Australia. This study explored practitioners' perceptions about reaching priority population groups through INFANT or similar universal preventive health programmes and services implemented at scale. Fifteen semi-structured online interviews were conducted with purposively selected experienced practitioners. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Two main themes were developed, representing the complexities of reaching priority population groups through universal health programmes and services in early childhood. Theme 1: "We're not hitting the mark"-Underlying issues influence universal healthcare access, highlighted (a) the perception that parents felt out of place through a sense of not belonging or being unfamiliar with universal services and (b) that practical constraints and pressing priorities impacted access. Theme 2: "There are no easy answers"-Varied approaches can enhance engagement, but the path is not straightforward, encompassed (a) the importance of trust and familiarity with providers, (b) the suitability of programmes and services for target communities, and (c) factors such as practitioner uncertainty regarding approaches that could address the needs of families from priority populations and resourcing that can limit targeted efforts. Our findings highlight the complexities of achieving equitable reach during scale-up and the varied decision-making and resourcing for addressing inequity in a local context. While our findings identify local-level strategies to address equitable reach during scale-up, we emphasise that striving to achieve health equity should be embedded and prioritised in scale-up efforts.
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.