Organizational Readiness to Engage in Policy, System, and Environment Changes Supporting Positive Youth Development for Health: Case Studies from the Cooperative Extension System Framed by the Transtheoretical Model

Cooperative Extension\u27s National Framework for Health and Wellness identified Positive Youth Development for Health (PYDH) outcomes at the individual (education) and community (policy, system, and environment) change levels, calling on Extension professionals to integrate public health principles into youth development programs. However, Extension professionals may not be equipped to effectively incorporate these principles and related strategies in the youth development context. An assessment of Extension professionals’ readiness to integrate public health approaches, such as community-level change strategies, with youth program efforts suggests these professionals may lack knowledge of practical steps for including policy, system, and environment change methodology into their daily work. Recommendations framed by the transtheoretical model (TTM) to guide Extension in advancing readiness among Extension educators at the organizational level have been developed. However, context-specific examples that illustrate such approaches and show how they fit within youth development programs are lacking. This article provides concrete case examples from the Extension system illustrating readiness levels at each TTM stage. Associated recommendations and implications for supporting youth development programs to effectively engage in influencing multilevel change strategies are also provided

Determinants of implementing of pet robots in nursing homes for dementia care

Background: Pet robots have been employed as viable substitutes to pet therapy in nursing homes. Despite their potential to enhance the psychosocial health of residents with dementia, there is a lack of studies that have investigated determinants of implementing pet robots in real-world practice. This study aims to explore the determinants of implementing pet robots for dementia care in nursing homes, from the perspectives of healthcare professionals and organisational leaders. Methods: A descriptive qualitative study, conceptualised and guided using the Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research (CFIR), was conducted. We conducted semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals and organisational leaders from nursing homes. Data was transcribed and analysed using Framework Analysis, based on the CFIR as an a priori framework. Results: A total of 22 participants from eight nursing homes were included. Determinants were mapped to constructs from all five CFIR domains. Determinants relating to the characteristics of pet robots include their design, realisticness and interactivity, affordability, cleanability, perceived evidence strength and comparative advantages to live pets. Determinants relating to external influences (outer setting) include national regulatory guidelines, funding and networks with other organisations. With regards to characteristics of nursing homes (inner setting), determinants include the relevance of pet robots in relation to the needs of residents with dementia, alignment with care processes, infection control mandates and their relative priority. In the domain ‘characteristics of individuals’, determinants were associated with individuals’ beliefs on the role of technology, desires to enhance residents’ quality of life, and differential attitudes on the use of robots. Finally, in the domain ‘implementation process’, assessments and care planning were identified as determinants. Conclusions: Overall, while sentiments around determinants within CFIR domains of pet robots’ characteristics, outer setting and implementation process were similar, participants’ opinions on the determinants within the ‘inner setting’ and ‘characteristics of individuals’ were more varied. This could be due to different organisational structures, disciplinary differences and personal experiences of using pet robots. Many determinants in different domains were interrelated. Findings provide a springboard for identifying and designing implementation strategies to guide the translation of pet robots from research into real-world practice

Youth Workers’ Role in Engaging Youth in Health Advocacy for Community-Level Change

Youth development professionals and volunteers, here referred to collectively as “youth workers,” need to be prepared to engage young people as health advocates. Youth workers need an understanding of public health principles; policy, systems, environment change approaches; and effective youth–adult strategies to move from viewing youth as participants to engaged leaders in community health issues. Embracing youth as partners will create effective partnerships and yield substantial positive health impacts for the youth, adults, and their communities

Using behavioral science to increase core outcome set use in trials

ObjectivesCore outcome sets (COS) are agreed sets of outcomes for use in clinical trials, which can increase standardization and reduce heterogeneity of outcomes in research. Using a COS, or not, is a behavior that can potentially be increased using behavioral strategies. The aim of this study was to identify behavioral intervention components to potentially increase use of COS in trials.MethodsThis project was informed by the Behavior Change Wheel framework. Two reviewers extracted barriers and facilitators to COS use from four recently published studies examining COS use in trials. Barriers and facilitators were coded to the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behavior (COM-B) model, which forms part of the Behavior Change Wheel. COM-B findings were mapped to intervention functions by two reviewers, and then mapped to behavior change techniques (BCTs). Full-team Affordability, Practicability, Effectiveness/Cost-effectiveness, Acceptability, Side effects/Safety, Equity ratings were used to reach consensus on intervention functions and BCTs. BCTs were operationalized using examples of tangible potential applications and were categorized based on similarity.ResultsBarriers and facilitators were identified for all capability, opportunity and motivation aspects of the COM-B model. Five intervention functions (education, training, enablement, persuasion, and modeling) and 15 BCTs were identified. Thirty-six BCT examples were developed, including providing information on benefits of COS for health research, and information choosing COS. BCT examples are categorized by approaches related to “workshops,” “guidance,” “audio/visual resources,” and “other resources.”ConclusionStudy findings represent diverse ways to potentially increase COS use in trials. Future work is needed to examine effects of these behavioral intervention components on COS use. If effective, increased use of COS can improve outcome reporting and minimize outcome heterogeneity and research waste

Demystifying Open Science in health psychology and behavioral medicine: a practical guide to Registered Reports and Data Notes

Open Science practices are integral to increasing transparency, reproducibility, and accessibility of research in health psychology and behavioral medicine. Drives to facilitate Open Science practices are becoming increasingly evident in journal editorial policies, including the establishment of new paper formats such as Registered Reports and Data Notes. This paper provides: (i) an overview of the current state of Open Science policies within health psychology and behavioral medicine, (ii) a call for submissions to an Article Collection of Registered Reports and Data Notes as new paper formats within the journal of Health Psychology & Behavioral Medicine, (iii) an overview of Registered Reports and Data Notes, and (iv) practical considerations for authors and reviewers of Registered Reports and Data Notes

Fidelity of Interventions to Reduce or Prevent Stress and/or Anxiety from Pregnancy up to Two Years Postpartum: A Systematic Review

IntroductionIntervention fidelity refers to whether an intervention is delivered as intended and can enhance interpretation of trial outcomes. Fidelity of interventions to reduce or prevent stress and anxiety during pregnancy and postpartum has yet to be examined despite inconsistent findings for intervention effects. This study systematically reviews use and/or reporting of intervention fidelity strategies in trials of interventions, delivered to (expectant) parents during pregnancy and postpartum, to reduce or prevent stress and/or anxiety.MethodsMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsychINFO, and Maternity and Infant Care were searched from inception to March 2019. Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials including pregnant women, expectant fathers and/or partners during pregnancy, and/ or parents within the first two years postpartum. The National Institutes of Health Behavior Change Consortium checklist was used to assess fidelity across five domains (study design, provider training, delivery, receipt, enactment).ResultsSixteen papers (14 interventions) were identified. Average reported use of fidelity strategies was ‘low’ (45%), ranging from 17.5 to 76%. Fidelity ratings ranged from 22% for provider training to 54% for study design.ConclusionsLow levels of intervention fidelity may explain previous inconsistent effects of stress and anxiety reduction interventions. Important methodological areas for improvement include intervention provider training, fidelity of comparator conditions, and consideration of non-specific treatment effects. Increased methodological rigour in fidelity enhancement and assessment will improve intervention implementation and enhance examination of stress and anxiety reduction and prevention interventions delivered during pregnancy and the postpartum

Using behavioural science to enhance use of core outcome sets in trials: protocol.

BackgroundCore outcome sets (COS) represent agreed-upon sets of outcomes, which are the minimum that should be measured and reported in all trials in specific health areas. Use of COS can reduce outcome heterogeneity, selective outcome reporting, and research waste, and can facilitate evidence syntheses. Despite benefits of using COS, current use of COS in trials is low. COS use can be understood as a behaviour, in that it is something trialists do, or not do, adequately. The aim of this study is to identify strategies, informed by behaviour change theory, to increase COS use in trials.MethodsThe project will be conducted in two stages, informed by the behaviour change wheel (BCW). The BCW is a theoretically based framework that can be used to classify, identify, and develop behaviour change strategies. In Stage 1, barriers and enablers to COS use will be extracted from published studies that examined trialist's use of COS. Barriers and facilitators will be mapped to the components of COM-B model (capability, opportunity, and motivation), which forms part of the BCW framework. Stage 2 will build on Stage 1 findings to identify and select intervention functions and behaviour change techniques to enhance COS use in trials.DiscussionThe findings of this study will provide an understanding of the behavioural factors that influence COS use in trials and what strategies might be used to target these factors to increase COS use in trials

Investigating and evaluating evidence of the behavioural determinants of adherence to social distancing measures – A protocol for a scoping review of COVID-19 research

Background: The WHO has declared the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a pandemic. With no vaccine currently available, using behavioural measures to reduce the spread of the virus within the population is an important tool in mitigating the effects of this pandemic. As such, social distancing measures are being implemented globally and have proven an effective tool in slowing the large-scale spread of the virus. Aim: This scoping review will focus on answering key questions about the state of the evidence on the behavioural determinants of adherence to social distancing measures in research on COVID-19. Methods: A scoping review will be conducted in accordance with guidelines for best practice. Literature searches will be conducted using online databases and grey literature sources. Databases will include Medline, Web of Science, Embase and PsycInfo, alongside relevant pre-print servers. Grey literature will be searched on Google Scholar. Screening, data extraction and quality appraisal will be conducted by members of the research team, with any discrepancies resolved by consensus discussion. Quality appraisal will be conducted using the Cochrane’s ROBINS-I tool, the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist where appropriate. Results will be analysed by mapping findings onto the Theoretical Domains Framework and visualising characteristics of the included studies using EviAtlas. This scoping review is pre-registered with Open Science Framework. Conclusions: The results of this study may facilitate the systematic development of behavioural interventions to increase adherence to social distancing measures

Selective outcome reporting in trials of behavioural health interventions in health psychology and behavioural medicine journals: a review

Selective outcome reporting can result in overestimation of treatment effects, research waste, and reduced openness and transparency. This review aimed to examine selective outcome reporting in trials of behavioural health interventions and determine potential outcome reporting bias. A review of nine health psychology and behavioural medicine journals was conducted to identify randomised controlled trials of behavioural health interventions published since 2019. Discrepancies in outcome reporting were observed in 90% of the 29 trials with corresponding registrations/protocols. Discrepancies included 72% of trials omitting prespecified outcomes; 55% of trials introduced new outcomes. Thirty-eight percent of trials omitted prespecified and introduced new outcomes. Three trials (10%) downgraded primary outcomes in registrations/protocols to secondary outcomes in final reports; downgraded outcomes were not statistically significant in two trials. Five trials (17%) upgraded secondary outcomes to primary outcomes; upgraded outcomes were statistically significant in all trials. In final reports, three trials (7%) omitted outcomes from the methods section; three trials (7%) introduced new outcomes in results that were not in the methods. These findings indicate that selective outcome reporting is a problem in behavioural health intervention trials. Journal- and trialist-level approaches are needed to minimise selective outcome reporting in health psychology and behavioural medicine