Development of a framework for the co-production and prototyping of public health interventions
Development of a framework for the co-production and prototyping of public health interventions
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12889-017-4695-8
复制
发表时间：
2017-09-04
影响因子：
4.5
通讯作者：
White, James
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hawkins, Jemma;Madden, Kim;White, James
背景资料：现有的制定公共卫生干预措施的指南没有为研究人员提供信息，说明如何与干预措施提供者合作，在评估之前共同制作和原型化新干预措施的内容和交付。ASSIST + Frank研究旨在调整现有有效的同伴引导的预防吸烟干预措施（ASSIST），整合英国药物教育资源Talk to Frank（www.talktofrank.com）的新内容，共同制作两个新的基于学校的同伴引导的药物预防干预措施。一个三阶段的框架进行了测试，以适应和发展的干预内容和交付方法与主要利益相关者合作，以促进implementation.Methods：该框架的三个阶段是：1）证据审查和利益相关者咨询; 2）合作生产; 3）原型。在第一阶段，与关键利益攸关方（例如威尔士公共卫生[PHW] ASSIST交付团队、教师、学生、卫生专业人员）进行了6个焦点小组、12次咨询、5次访谈和9次干预交付观察。在第二阶段，成立了一个由研究小组和PHW ASSIST交付小组成员组成的干预发展小组，以适应现有的，并共同制作新的干预活动。在第3阶段，干预培训和内容迭代原型使用的保真度和可接受性的关键利益相关者的过程数据。第二阶段和第三阶段采取了行动研究过程的形式，包括一系列面对面的会议，电子邮件交流，观察和培训课程。结果：利用三阶段的框架，我们共同制作和测试的干预内容和交付方法的两个干预超过18个月的时间，涉及外部合作伙伴。这一进程产生了新的和经过调整的干预活动，以及在内容、交付形式、活动的时间安排和顺序以及培训手册方面的改进。干预交付工作人员，参与者和教师的参与形成的内容和格式的干预措施，以及支持快速原型的背景下，在最后stage.Conclusions：这三个阶段的框架扩展了目前的指导干预发展提供一步一步的指示，共同生产和原型干预的内容和交付过程之前，试点和正式评估。这一框架加强了现有的指导，并可转用于共同制定其他公共卫生干预措施并制作其原型。
Background: Existing guidance for developing public health interventions does not provide information for researchers about how to work with intervention providers to co-produce and prototype the content and delivery of new interventions prior to evaluation. The ASSIST + Frank study aimed to adapt an existing effective peer-led smoking prevention intervention (ASSIST), integrating new content from the UK drug education resource Talk to Frank (www.talktofrank.com) to co-produce two new school-based peer-led drug prevention interventions. A three-stage framework was tested to adapt and develop intervention content and delivery methods in collaboration with key stakeholders to facilitate implementation.Methods: The three stages of the framework were: 1) Evidence review and stakeholder consultation; 2) Co-production; 3) Prototyping. During stage 1, six focus groups, 12 consultations, five interviews, and nine observations of intervention delivery were conducted with key stakeholders (e.g. Public Health Wales [PHW] ASSIST delivery team, teachers, school students, health professionals). During stage 2, an intervention development group consisting of members of the research team and the PHW ASSIST delivery team was established to adapt existing, and co-produce new, intervention activities. In stage 3, intervention training and content were iteratively prototyped using process data on fidelity and acceptability to key stakeholders. Stages 2 and 3 took the form of an action-research process involving a series of face-to-face meetings, email exchanges, observations, and training sessions.Results: Utilising the three-stage framework, we co-produced and tested intervention content and delivery methods for the two interventions over a period of 18 months involving external partners. New and adapted intervention activities, as well as refinements in content, the format of delivery, timing and sequencing of activities, and training manuals resulted from this process. The involvement of intervention delivery staff, participants and teachers shaped the content and format of the interventions, as well as supporting rapid prototyping in context at the final stage.Conclusions: This three-stage framework extends current guidance on intervention development by providing step-by-step instructions for co-producing and prototyping an intervention's content and delivery processes prior to piloting and formal evaluation. This framework enhances existing guidance and could be transferred to co-produce and prototype other public health interventions.