scholarly journals Community mobilisation approaches to preventing and reducing adolescent multiple risk behaviour: a realist review protocol

Author(s):  
Laura Tinner ◽  
Deborah Caldwell ◽  
Rona Campbell

Background: Adolescent multiple risk behaviour (MRB) continues to be a global health issue, contributing to the burden of non-communicable diseases. Most interventions have focused on the proximal causes of adolescent MRB such as peer or family influence, rather than targeting the wider environmental or structural context. There is increasing recognition that community mobilisation approaches that extend beyond individually-focused educational programmes could be beneficial for adolescent health. Despite this, there are gaps in the current literature, theory and implementation that would benefit from a realist approach due to the suitability of this methodology to analysing complex interventions. In this protocol, we outline our study that aims to understand how, why, for whom and in what circumstances and time periods do community mobilisation interventions work to prevent and/or reduce adolescent multiple risk behaviour? Methods: A realist review was chosen as the most suitable review method as it is theory-driven and seeks to understand how, why and for whom interventions work to produce intended and unintended outcomes. A six-stage iterative process is outlined, which includes initial development of a programme theory, systematic searching, study selection and appraisal, data extraction and data synthesis. We will engage with stakeholders at different stages in this process to aid the development of the programme theory. Discussion: The goal of this realist review is to identify and refine a programme theory for community mobilisation approaches to the prevention and/or reduction of adolescent multiple risk behaviour. Our aim is that the findings surrounding the programme theory refinement can be used to develop and implement adolescent multiple risk behaviour interventions and maintain collaboration between local policy makers, researchers and community members.

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tinner Laura ◽  
Caldwell Deborah ◽  
Campbell Rona

Abstract Background Adolescent multiple risk behaviour (MRB) continues to be a global health issue. Most interventions have focused on the proximal causes of adolescent MRB such as peer or family influence, rather than targeting the wider environmental or structural context. There is increasing recognition that community mobilisation approaches could be beneficial for adolescent health. Despite this, there are gaps in the current literature, theory and implementation that would benefit from a realist approach due to the suitability of this methodology to analysing complex interventions. The objective of this study is to understand ‘how, why, for whom and in what circumstances and time periods’ do community mobilisation interventions work to prevent and/or reduce adolescent multiple risk behaviour. Methods This is a protocol for a realist review. The review will use a six-stage iterative process, guided by the RAMESES framework. We will systematically search PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL and Sociological Abstracts, from their inception to 2021. Studies will be screened for relevance to the programme theory and included based on a priori eligibility criteria including (1) reporting a community mobilisation intervention (2) targeting two health risk behaviors (3) for adolescent populations. Two independent reviewers will select, screen and extract data related to the program theory from all relevant sources. A realist logic of analysis will be used to identify all context-mechanism-outcome configurations that contribute to our programme theory. The findings will be synthesised to produce a refined programme theory model. Discussion The goal of this realist review is to identify and refine a programme theory for community mobilisation approaches to the prevention and/or reduction of adolescent multiple risk behaviour. Our aim is that the findings surrounding the programme theory refinement can be used to develop and implement adolescent multiple risk behaviour interventions and maintain collaboration between local policy makers, researchers and community members. Systematic review registration This realist review is registered on the PROSPERO database (registration number: CRD42020205342).


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. e024982 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vicky Booth ◽  
Rowan Harwood ◽  
Jennie E Hancox ◽  
Victoria Hood-Moore ◽  
Tahir Masud ◽  
...  

ObjectivesThis review aimed to identify mechanisms underlying participation in falls prevention interventions, in older adults with cognitive impairment. In particular we studied the role of motivation.DesignA realist review of the literature.Data sourcesEMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO and PEDRO.Eligibility criteriaPublications reporting exercise-based interventions for people with cognitive impairment, including dementia, living in the community.Data extraction and synthesisA ‘rough programme theory’ (a preliminary model of how an intervention works) was developed, tested against findings from the published literature and refined. Data were collected according to elements of the programme theory and not isolated to outcomes. Motivation emerged as a key element, and was prioritised for further study.ResultsAn individual will access mechanisms to support participation when they think that exercise will be beneficial to them. Supportive mechanisms include having a ‘gate-keeper’, such as a carer or therapist, who shares responsibility for the perception of exercise as beneficial. Lack of access to support decreases adherence and participation in exercise. Motivational mechanisms were particularly relevant for older adults with mild-to-moderate dementia, where the exercise intervention was multicomponent, in a preferred setting, at the correct intensity and level of progression, correctly supported and considered, and flexibly delivered.ConclusionMotivation is a key element enabling participation in exercise-based interventions for people with cognitive impairment. Many of the mechanisms identified in this review have parallels in motivational theory. Clinically relevant recommendations were derived and will be used to further develop and test a motivationally considered exercise-based falls intervention for people with mild dementia.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42015030169.


2009 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 634-639 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Drieskens ◽  
H. Van Oyen ◽  
S. Demarest ◽  
J. Van der Heyden ◽  
L. Gisle ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. e027588 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharine Weetman ◽  
Geoff Wong ◽  
Emma Scott ◽  
Eilidh MacKenzie ◽  
Stephanie Schnurr ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo understand how different outcomes are achieved from adult patients receiving hospital discharge letters from inpatient and outpatient settings.DesignRealist review conducted in six main steps: (1) development of initial theory, (2) searching, (3) screening and selection, (4) data extraction and analysis, (5) data synthesis and (6) programme theory (PT) refinement.Eligibility criteriaDocuments reporting evidence that met criteria for relevance to the PT. Documents relating solely to mental health or children aged <18 years were excluded.AnalysisData were extracted and analysed using a realist logic of analysis. Texts were coded for concepts relating to context, mechanism, outcome configurations (CMOCs) for the intervention of patients receiving discharge letters. All outcomes were considered. Based on evidence and our judgement, CMOCs were labelled ‘positive’ or ‘negative’ in order to clearly distinguish between contexts where the intervention does and does not work.Results3113 documents were screened and 103 were included. Stakeholders contributed to refining the PT in step 6. The final PT included 48 CMOCs for how outcomes are affected by patients receiving discharge letters. ‘Patient choice’ emerged as a key influencer to the success (or not) of the intervention. Important contexts were identified for both ‘positive’ CMOCs (eg, no new information in letter) and ‘negative’ CMOCs (eg, letter sent without verifying patient contact details). Two key findings were that patient understanding is possibly greater than clinicians perceive, and that patients tend to express strong preference for receiving letters. Clinician concerns emerged as a barrier to wider sharing of discharge letters with patients, which may need to be addressed through organisational policies and direction.ConclusionsThis review forms a starting point for explaining outcomes associated with whether or not patients receive discharge letters. It suggests several ways in which current processes might be modified to support improved practice and patient experience.


2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth R Kipping ◽  
Michèle Smith ◽  
Jon Heron ◽  
Matthew Hickman ◽  
Rona Campbell

2012 ◽  
Vol 34 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. i20-i30 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. J. MacArthur ◽  
M. C. Smith ◽  
R. Melotti ◽  
J. Heron ◽  
J. Macleod ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 34 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. i1-i2 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. R. Kipping ◽  
R. M. Campbell ◽  
G. J. MacArthur ◽  
D. J. Gunnell ◽  
M. Hickman

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document