What works, for whom, and under what circumstances for recipients of training in opportunistic behaviour change conversations: a mixed methods realist evaluation protocol
Nichol, B.; Rodrigues, A. M.; Anderson-Weaver, R.; Dalkin, S.; Hunter, R.; Brown, H.; Morganer, C.; Stuart, B.; Albury, C.; Haighton, C.
Show abstract
Background Making Every Contact Count (MECC) is a person-centred initiative that enables service providers across settings to support behaviour change through conversations about health and wellbeing. MECC has been widely implemented across the UK and internationally, although training approaches vary considerably and do not consistently translate into MECC delivery. Evidence suggests that Healthy Conversation Skills (HCS) training, which supports service users to identify their own solutions, may be an acceptable and effective means of delivering MECC across settings. This realist evaluation aims to understand which elements of HCS training work, for whom, under what circumstances, in what respects, to what extent, and why, to inform the adaptation of HCS across settings to ensure that all recipients are equipped to deliver MECC. MethodsThis mixed-methods realist evaluation will comprise pre- and post-training surveys (at baseline, immediately post-training, and approximately eight weeks post-training) and realist interviews. Two participant groups were selected for comparison: service providers working or volunteering in the voluntary, community, and social enterprise (VCSE) sector, and undergraduate pharmacy students. Initial programme theories were developed through abductive reasoning, literature scoping, and stakeholder engagement. Survey data will assess outcomes of HCS training, while realist interviews will explore how these outcomes are generated by underlying mechanisms within specific contexts. DiscussionA refined programme theory will be produced, explaining how and why HCS training leads to MECC delivery across different settings. Findings will inform how HCS training can be adapted for distinct audiences, identify the core components of MECC training that must be preserved, and guide future evaluations by examining whether HCS training translates into sustained MECC delivery. The findings of this study will inform resource allocation for preventative health interventions outside of healthcare settings and thus have the potential to shape public health policy, empower non-specialist providers, and strengthen strategies for disease prevention.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Determinants of regulatory compliance in health and social care services: a systematic review using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research 94%
- Effectiveness of Online Training in Improving Primary Care Doctors Competency in Brief Tobacco Interventions: A Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial of WHO Modules in Delta State, Nigeria 94%
- Rationale and design of the Health Professional Students at the University of Illinois Chicago (HOLISTIC) Cohort Study 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- How, why and when are delayed (back-up) antibiotic prescriptions used in primary care? A realist review integrating concepts of uncertainty in healthcare 94%
- How best do we engage the general population in testing for COVID-19? 93%
- A whole system approach to increasing children’s physical activity in a multi-ethnic UK city: a process evaluation protocol 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Implementation Science Protocol for a participatory, theory-informed implementation research programme in the context of health system strengthening in sub-Saharan Africa (ASSET-ImplementER) 95%
- How and why do Quality Circles work for General Practitioners - a realist approach 94%
- How can rural community-engaged health services planning affect sustainable health care system changes? - A process description and qualitative analysis of data from the Rural Coordination Centre of British Columbia’s Rural Site Visits Project 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Comparing in-person, blended and virtual training interventions; a real-world evaluation of HIV capacity building programs in 16 countries in sub-Saharan Africa 93%
- Improving patient-centred counselling skills among lay healthcare workers in South Africa using the Thusa-Thuso motivational interviewing training and support program 93%
- Evaluating the implementation of weekly rifapentine-isoniazid (3HP) for tuberculosis prevention among people living with HIV in Uganda: A qualitative evaluation of the 3HP Options Trial 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Implementation strategies for telemental health: a systematic review 93%
- Differences in medication reconciliation interventions between six hospitals: a mixed method study 93%
- ‘Leading from the front’ implementation strategies increase the success of influenza vaccination drives among healthcare workers: A reanalysis of Systematic Review evidence using Intervention Component Analysis (ICA) and Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.