Table 1 Author self-reported adaptations to the intervention or implementation strategies reported at scale-up
From: From trials to communities: implementation and scale-up of health behaviour interventions
Item | Item responses | n (%) |
|---|---|---|
When the original trial finished, was the intervention implemented in other settings or organisations not involved in the original trial? (n = 99) | No | 28 (28%) |
Yes | 49 (49%) | |
Don’t know | 22 (22%) | |
Do you know if the intervention was adapted before being implemented within the organisations other than those who consented to be involved in the original trial? (n = 46)a | No, it continued to be implemented exactly as it was developed | 15 (33%) |
Yes, it was adapted | 25 (54%) | |
Don’t know | 6 (13%) | |
If it was adapted please select all that apply (n = 25)b | It was adapted to fit within the local service setting (i.e. to fit with available resources and funding) | 12 (48%) |
It was adapted to fit with the target audience (i.e. tailored to the characteristics of the target population) | 8 (32%) | |
The mode of delivery was adapted (i.e. dose, length, timing) | 9 (36%) | |
It was adapted to align with the culture of the setting | 5 (20%) | |
Core components of the intervention were adapted based on results of testing and research | 3 (12%) | |
Intervention components or content were added | 12 (48%) | |
Intervention content or components were removed | 6 (24%) | |
Do you think that the adaptations made were likely to have impacted on the effectiveness of the intervention? (n = 25)c | Yes, I think it would have likely increased the effectiveness of the intervention | 8 (32%) |
Yes, I think it would have likely diluted the effectiveness of the intervention | 8 (32%) | |
No, I don’t think it would have had an impact on the effectiveness of the intervention | 3 (12%) | |
Unsure | 6 (24%) |