ArticlePloS one2025
Perceived challenges and enablers to evaluating a whole systems approach initiative: Reflections of embedded researchers.
Article in PloS one, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Physical inactivity remains a substantial public health concern, with complex socio-environmental factors contributing to increasing inactivity. Whole systems approaches to physical activity seek to address these complexities by promoting multi-component, place-based interventions. This study reflects on the experiences of three embedded researchers working within a whole systems approach initiative aimed at reducing physical inactivity in the United Kingdom. Researchers were embedded within a local authority and affiliated to a university whilst responsible for evaluating the effectiveness and efficacy of the whole systems approach initiative. Using a reflective journaling method, followed by inductive thematic analysis, the findings identified key challenges and enablers to evaluating the initiative. Key challenges included the perceived value of research and evaluation within the local authority, a lack of capacity to conduct evaluative activity, and the presence of confirmation and reporting bias within the wider delivery team. Key enablers included relationship-building, skill development, and protected time for evaluation and research activity. The findings suggest that institutions supporting embedded researchers should establish regular contact with the local authority, help to establish realistic expectations, and support researchers to overcome emerging challenges. Recommendations for researchers include developing robust relationships, setting out clear expectations, and ensure they have protected time at key points during the evaluation. Through these recommendations, researchers may be better prepared to overcome implementation challenges and improve the efficiency of the evaluation process.
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.