Dataset Information

Internal and External Validity of Social Media and Mobile Technology-Driven HPV Vaccination Interventions: Systematic Review Using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) Framework.

ABSTRACT: Social media human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination interventions show promise for increasing HPV vaccination rates. An important consideration for the implementation of effective interventions into real-world practice is the translation potential, or external validity, of the intervention. To this end, we conducted a systematic literature review to describe the current body of evidence regarding the external validity of social media HPV vaccination-related interventions. Constructs related to external validity were based on the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. Seventeen articles published between 2006 and 2020 met the inclusion criteria. Three researchers independently coded each article using a validated RE-AIM framework. Discrepant codes were discussed with a fourth reviewer to gain consensus. Of these 17 studies, 3 were pilot efficacy studies, 10 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate effectiveness, 1 was a population-based study, and 3 did not explicitly state which type of study was conducted. Reflecting this distribution of study types, across all studies the mean level of reporting RE-AIM dimensions varied with reach recording 90.8%, effectiveness (72.1%), adoption (40.3%), implementation (45.6%), and maintenance (26.5%). This review suggests that while the current HPV vaccination social media-driven interventions provide sufficient information on internal validity (reach and effectiveness), few have aimed to gather data on external validity needed to translate the interventions into real world implementation. Our data suggest that implementation research is needed to move HPV vaccination-related interventions into practice. Included in this review are recommendations for enhancing the design and reporting of these HPV vaccination social media-related interventions.

SUBMITTER: Asare M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7996801 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThe purpose of this review was to use RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) to assess the extent to which weight gain prevention studies targeting young adults reported on elements of external validity.DesignSystematic review.Eligibility criteriaArticles of interest included a lifestyle/behavioral intervention targeting weight gain prevention. Eligibility criteria included the following: study design of randomized controlled trials, quasi-randomized control trials, or natural experiments; average participant age between 18 and 35 years; study duration of at least 12 months; and published in English between January 2008 and May 2018. Studies had to report weight or body mass index as a measured outcome and were excluded if they were paired with smoking cessation programs, were conducted in specific groups (ie, pregnant women, breast cancer survivors), or were follow-ups to weight loss studies.Study selectionAfter removing duplicates, the search yielded 11426 articles. Titles and abstracts were screened by 1 reviewer; 144 articles were assessed in a full-text review by 2 reviewers. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Nine studies (13 articles) were included in the review.Main outcomes measuresReported elements of the RE-AIM framework.ResultsA total of 9 studies met the selection criteria. All studies lacked full reporting on external validity elements. Of the total of 60 RE-AIM reporting criteria, 8 were reported by all 9 studies, 26 criteria were reported by fewer than 4 studies, and 22 criteria were not reported by any of the studies.DiscussionThere remains inadequate reporting of elements of external validity and generalizability in weight gain prevention studies. This is a significant scientific constraint that limits the information required to disseminate and implement prevention of weight gain interventions for population impact. Standardized reporting may be needed to ensure results that demonstrate not only internal validity but also external validity and generalizability are needed to promote public health impact.

Project description:BackgroundThe RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) framework is a useful tool for evaluating the impact of programs in community settings. RE-AIM has been applied to evaluate individual programs but seldom used to evaluate the collective impact of community-based, public health programming developed and delivered by multiple autonomous organizations. The purposes of this paper were to (a) demonstrate how RE-AIM can be operationalized and applied to evaluate the collective impact of similar autonomous programs that promote health and well-being and (b) provide preliminary data on the collective impact of Canadian spinal cord injury (SCI) peer mentorship programs on the delivery of peer mentorship services.MethodsCriteria from all five RE-AIM dimensions were operationalized to evaluate multiple similar community-based programs. For this study, nine provincial organizations that serve people with SCI were recruited from across Canada. Organizations completed a structured self-report questionnaire and participated in a qualitative telephone interview to examine different elements of their peer mentorship program. Data were analyzed using summary statistics.ResultsHaving multiple indicators to assess RE-AIM dimensions provided a broad evaluation of the impact of Canadian SCI peer mentorship programs. Peer mentorship programs reached 1.63% of the estimated Canadian SCI population. The majority (67%) of organizations tracked the effectiveness of peer mentorship through testimonials and reports. Setting-level adoption rates were high with 100% of organizations offering peer mentorship in community and hospital settings. On average, organizations allocated 10.4% of their operating budget and 9.8% of their staff to implement peer mentorship and 89% had maintained their programming for over 10 years. Full interpretation of the collective impact of peer mentorship programs was limited as complete data were only collected for 52% of survey questions.ConclusionsThe lack of available organizational data highlights a significant challenge when using RE-AIM to evaluate the collective impact of multiple programs that promote health and well-being. Although researchers are encouraged to use RE-AIM to evaluate the collective impact of programs delivered by different organizations, documenting limitations and providing recommendations should be done to further the understanding of how best to operationalize RE-AIM in these contexts.

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess aspects of the internal validity of recently published cluster randomised trials and explore the reporting of information useful in assessing the external validity of these trials.DesignReview of 34 cluster randomised trials in primary care published in 2004 and 2005 in seven journals (British Medical Journal, British Journal of General Practice, Family Practice, Preventive Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, Journal of General Internal Medicine, Pediatrics).Data sourcesNational Library of Medicine (Medline) via PubMed.Data extractionTo assess aspects of internal validity we extracted data on appropriateness of sample size calculations and analyses, methods of identifying and recruiting individual participants, and blinding. To explore reporting of information useful in assessing external validity we extracted data on cluster eligibility, cluster inclusion and retention, cluster generalisability, and the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention to health providers in clusters.Results21 (62%) trials accounted for clustering in sample size calculations and 30 (88%) in the analysis; about a quarter were potentially biased because of procedures surrounding recruitment and identification of patients; individual participants were blind to allocation status in 19 (56%) and outcome assessors were blind in 15 (44%). In almost half the reports, information relating to generalisability of clusters was poorly reported, and in two fifths there was no information about the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention.ConclusionsCluster randomised trials are essential for evaluating certain types of interventions. Issues affecting their internal validity, such as appropriate sample size calculations and analysis, have been widely disseminated and are now better addressed by researchers. Blinding of those identifying and recruiting patients to allocation status is recommended but is not always carried out. There may be fewer barriers to internal validity in trials in which individual participants are not recruited. External validity seems poorly addressed in many trials, yet is arguably as important as internal validity in judging quality as a basis for healthcare intervention.

Project description:BackgroundMuch has been written about how the medical home model can enhance patient-centeredness, care continuity, and follow-up, but few comprehensive aids or resources exist to help practices accomplish these aims. The complexity of primary care can overwhelm those concerned with quality improvement.MethodsThe RE-AIM planning and evaluation model was used to develop a multimedia, multiple-health behavior tool with psychosocial assessment and feedback features to facilitate and guide patient-centered communication, care, and follow-up related to prevention and self-management of the most common adult chronic illnesses seen in primary care.ResultsThe Connection to Health Patient Self-Management System, a web-based patient assessment and support resource, was developed using the RE-AIM factors of reach (e.g., allowing input and output via choice of different modalities), effectiveness (e.g., using evidence-based intervention strategies), adoption (e.g., assistance in integrating the system into practice workflows and permitting customization of the website and feedback materials by practice teams), implementation (e.g., identifying and targeting actionable priority behavioral and psychosocial issues for patients and teams), and maintenance/sustainability (e.g., integration with current National Committee for Quality Assurance recommendations and clinical pathways of care). Connection to Health can work on a variety of input and output platforms, and assesses and provides feedback on multiple health behaviors and multiple chronic conditions frequently managed in adult primary care. As such, it should help to make patient-healthcare team encounters more informed and patient-centered. Formative research with clinicians indicated that the program addressed a number of practical concerns and they appreciated the flexibility and how the Connection to Health program could be customized to their office.ConclusionsThis primary care practice tool based on an implementation science model has the potential to guide patients to more healthful behaviors and improved self-management of chronic conditions, while fostering effective and efficient communication between patients and their healthcare team. RE-AIM and similar models can help clinicians and media developers create practical products more likely to be widely adopted, feasible in busy medical practices, and able to produce public health impact.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Controlled clinical trials of health care interventions are either explanatory or pragmatic. Explanatory trials test whether an intervention is efficacious; that is, whether it can have a beneficial effect in an ideal situation. Pragmatic trials measure effectiveness; they measure the degree of beneficial effect in real clinical practice. In pragmatic trials, a balance between external validity (generalizability of the results) and internal validity (reliability or accuracy of the results) needs to be achieved. The explanatory trial seeks to maximize the internal validity by assuring rigorous control of all variables other than the intervention. The pragmatic trial seeks to maximize external validity to ensure that the results can be generalized. However the danger of pragmatic trials is that internal validity may be overly compromised in the effort to ensure generalizability. We are conducting two pragmatic randomized controlled trials on interventions in the management of hypertension in primary care. We describe the design of the trials and the steps taken to deal with the competing demands of external and internal validity. DISCUSSION: External validity is maximized by having few exclusion criteria and by allowing flexibility in the interpretation of the intervention and in management decisions. Internal validity is maximized by decreasing contamination bias through cluster randomization, and decreasing observer and assessment bias, in these non-blinded trials, through baseline data collection prior to randomization, automating the outcomes assessment with 24 hour ambulatory blood pressure monitors, and blinding the data analysis. SUMMARY: Clinical trials conducted in community practices present investigators with difficult methodological choices related to maintaining a balance between internal validity (reliability of the results) and external validity (generalizability). The attempt to achieve methodological purity can result in clinically meaningless results, while attempting to achieve full generalizability can result in invalid and unreliable results. Achieving a creative tension between the two is crucial.

Dataset Information

Internal and External Validity of Social Media and Mobile Technology-Driven HPV Vaccination Interventions: Systematic Review Using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) Framework.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets