Logic models help make sense of complexity in systematic reviews and health technology assessments

OBJECTIVE: To describe the development and application of logic model templates for systematic reviews and health technology assessments (HTA) of complex interventions STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: This study demonstrates the development of a method to conceptualise complexity and make underlying assumptions transparent. Examples from systematic reviews with specific relevance to sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and other low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) illustrate its usefulness. RESULTS: Two distinct templates are presented: the system-based logic model, describing the system in which the interaction between participants, intervention and context takes place; and the process-orientated logic model, which displays the processes and causal pathways that lead from the intervention to multiple outcomes. CONCLUSION: Logic models can help authors of systematic reviews and HTAs to explicitly address and make sense of complexity, adding value by achieving a better understanding of the interactions between the intervention, its implementation and its multiple outcomes among a given population and context. They thus have the potential to help build systematic review capacity -in SSA and other LMICs - at an individual level, by equipping authors with a tool that facilitates the review process; and at a system-level, by improving communication between producers and potential users of research evidence

Making sense of complexity in context and implementation: the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions (CICI) framework.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of complex interventions, as well as their success in reaching relevant populations, is critically influenced by their implementation in a given context. Current conceptual frameworks often fail to address context and implementation in an integrated way and, where addressed, they tend to focus on organisational context and are mostly concerned with specific health fields. Our objective was to develop a framework to facilitate the structured and comprehensive conceptualisation and assessment of context and implementation of complex interventions. METHODS: The Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions (CICI) framework was developed in an iterative manner and underwent extensive application. An initial framework based on a scoping review was tested in rapid assessments, revealing inconsistencies with respect to the underlying concepts. Thus, pragmatic utility concept analysis was undertaken to advance the concepts of context and implementation. Based on these findings, the framework was revised and applied in several systematic reviews, one health technology assessment (HTA) and one applicability assessment of very different complex interventions. Lessons learnt from these applications and from peer review were incorporated, resulting in the CICI framework. RESULTS: The CICI framework comprises three dimensions-context, implementation and setting-which interact with one another and with the intervention dimension. Context comprises seven domains (i.e., geographical, epidemiological, socio-cultural, socio-economic, ethical, legal, political); implementation consists of five domains (i.e., implementation theory, process, strategies, agents and outcomes); setting refers to the specific physical location, in which the intervention is put into practise. The intervention and the way it is implemented in a given setting and context can occur on a micro, meso and macro level. Tools to operationalise the framework comprise a checklist, data extraction tools for qualitative and quantitative reviews and a consultation guide for applicability assessments. CONCLUSIONS: The CICI framework addresses and graphically presents context, implementation and setting in an integrated way. It aims at simplifying and structuring complexity in order to advance our understanding of whether and how interventions work. The framework can be applied in systematic reviews and HTA as well as primary research and facilitate communication among teams of researchers and with various stakeholders

ADAPT study: adaptation of evidence-informed complex population health interventions for implementation and/or re-evaluation in new contexts: protocol for a Delphi consensus exercise to develop guidance

Introduction Complex population health interventions that are effective in one context may not be effective elsewhere, and may even be harmful. As such, an intervention may require adaptation to ensure it fits with a new context. To date, there is no overarching guidance to help researchers to adapt and evaluate interventions in new contexts, and no criteria to support research funders or journals assess proposed or reported adaptations or evaluation. There is limited assistance for policy-makers and practitioners to decide if evidence-informed interventions are appropriate to their context, or if adaptation and further evaluation is needed. This Delphi exercise will contribute to the development of guidance for these communities to support the adaptation, implementation and/or re-evaluation of complex population health interventions in new contexts. Methods We will conduct a Delphi consensus exercise to gather expert opinion from researchers, research funders, journal editors and policy-makers. Expert opinion will be sought on: appropriate definitions and concepts, identifying key methodological considerations and establishing adaptations and processes to be undertaken during adaptation of complex population health interventions in new contexts. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval for the Delphi exercise has been obtained from the University of Glasgow and and the RAND institutional research board. Dissemination of the results of this study will be through peer-reviewed publications, workshops at national and international conferences, and a summary of the guidance developed for key organisations and stakeholders

Unintended health and societal consequences of international travel measures during the COVID-19 pandemic: A scoping review

RATIONALE FOR REVIEW International travel measures to contain the COVID-19 pandemic represent a relatively intrusive form of non-pharmaceutical intervention. To inform decision-making on the (re)implementation, adaptation, relaxation or suspension of such measures, it is essential to not only assess their effectiveness but also their unintended effects. This scoping review maps existing empirical studies on the unintended consequences, both predicted and unforeseen, and beneficial or harmful, of international travel measures. We searched multiple health, non-health and COVID-19-specific databases. The evidence was charted in a map in relation to the study design, intervention and outcome categories identified and discussed narratively. KEY FINDINGS Twenty-three studies met our inclusion criteria-nine quasi-experimental, two observational, two mathematical modelling, six qualitative, and four mixed-methods studies. Studies addressed different population groups across various countries worldwide. Seven studies provided information on unintended consequences of the closure of national borders, six looked at international travel restrictions, and three investigated mandatory quarantine of international travelers. No studies looked at entry and/or exit screening at national borders exclusively, however six studies considered this intervention in combination with other international travel measures. In total, eleven studies assessed various combinations of the aforementioned interventions. The outcomes were mostly referred to by the authors as harmful. Fifteen studies identified a variety of economic consequences, six reported on aspects related to quality of life, well-being, and mental health, and five on social consequences. One study each provided information on equity, equality, and the fair distribution of benefits and burdens, environmental consequences and health system consequences. CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS This scoping review represents the first step towards a systematic assessment of the unintended benefits and harms of international travel measures during COVID-19. The key research gaps identified might be filled with targeted primary research, as well as the additional consideration of gray literature and non-empirical studies

Low-smoke chulha in Indian slums: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background Biomass fuel is used as a primary cooking source by more than half of the world’s population, contributing to a high burden of disease. Although cleaner fuels are available, some households continue using solid fuels because of financial constraints and absence of infrastructure, especially in non-notified slums. The present study documents a randomised controlled study investigating the efficacy of improved cookstove on the personal exposure to air pollution and the respiratory health of women and children in an Indian slum. The improved cookstove was based on co-creation of a low-smoke chulha with local communities in order to support adaption and sustained uptake. Methods The study will be conducted in a non-notified slum called Ashrayanagar in Bangalore, India. The study design will be a 1:1 randomised controlled intervention trial, including 250 households. The intervention group will receive an improved cookstove (low-smoke chulha) and the control group will continue using either the traditional cookstove (chulha) or a combination of the traditional stove and the kerosene/diesel stove. Follow-up time is 1 year. Outcomes include change in lung function (FEV1/FVC), incidence of pneumonia, change in personal PM2.5 and CO exposure, incidence of respiratory symptoms (cough, phlegm, wheeze and shortness of breath), prevalence of other related symptoms (headache and burning eyes), change in behaviour and adoption of the stove. Ethical clearance was obtained from the Institutional Ethics Committee of the Indian Institute of Public Health Hyderabad- Bengaluru Campus. Discussion The findings from this study aim to provide insight into the effects of improved cookstoves in urban slums. Results can give evidence for the decrease of indoor air pollution and the improvement of respiratory health for children and women. Trial registration The trial was registered with clinicaltrials.gov on 21 June 2016 with the identifier NCT02821650; A Study to Test the Impact of an Improved Chulha on the Respiratory Health of Women and Children in Indian Slums

Adapting evidence-informed population health interventions for new contexts: a scoping review of current practice

Background Implementing evidence-informed population health interventions in new contexts often requires adaptations. While the need to adapt interventions to better fit new contexts is recognised, uncertainties remain regarding why and when to adapt (or not), and how to assess the benefits (or not) of adaptation. The ADAPT Study aims to develop comprehensive guidance on adaptation. This scoping review informs guidance development by mapping and exploring how adaptation has been undertaken in practice, in public health and health services research. Methods We searched seven databases from January 2000 and October 2018 to identify eligible studies for this scoping review and a related systematic review of adaptation guidance. We mapped the studies of adaptation by coding data from all eligible studies describing the methods, contexts, and interventions considered for adaptation. From this map, we selected a sample of studies for in-depth examination. Two reviewers extracted data independently into seven categories: description, key concepts, types, rationale, processes, evaluation methods, evaluation justification, and accounts of failures and successes. Results We retrieved 6694 unique records. From 429 records screened at full text, we identified 298 eligible studies for mapping and selected 28 studies for in-depth examination. The majority of studies in our map focused on micro- (i.e., individual-) level interventions (84%), related to transferring an intervention to a new population group within the same country (62%) and did not report using guidance (73%). Studies covered a range of topic areas, including health behaviour (24%), mental health (19%), sexual health (16%), and parenting and family-centred interventions (15%). Our in-depth analysis showed that adaptation is seen to save costs and time relative to developing a new intervention, and to enhance contextual relevance and cultural compatibility. It commonly follows a structured process and involves stakeholders to help with decisions on what to adapt, when, and how. Conclusions Adaptation has been undertaken on a range of health topics and largely in line with existing guidance. Significant gaps relate to adaptation of macro- (e.g., national-) level interventions, consideration of programme theories, mechanisms and contexts (i.e., a functional view of interventions), nuances around stakeholder involvement, and evaluation of the adapted interventions. Registration Open Science Framework, 2019, osf.io/udzma

Structured methodology review identified seven (RETREAT) criteria for selecting qualitative evidence synthesis approaches

OBJECTIVE: To compare and contrast different methods of qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) against criteria identified from the literature and to map their attributes to inform selection of the most appropriate QES method to answer research questions addressed by qualitative research. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Electronic databases, citation searching and a study register were used to identify studies reporting QES methods. Attributes compiled from 26 methodological papers (2001-2014) were used as a framework for data extraction. Data were extracted into summary tables by one reviewer and then considered within the author team. RESULTS: We identified seven considerations determining choice of methods from the methodological literature, encapsulated within the mnemonic RETREAT (Review question - Epistemology - Time/Timescale - Resources - Expertise - Audience and purpose - Type of Data). We mapped 15 different published QES methods against these seven criteria. The final framework focuses on stand-alone QES methods but may also hold potential when integrating quantitative and qualitative data. CONCLUSION: These findings offer a contemporary perspective as a conceptual basis for future empirical investigation of the advantages and disadvantages of different methods of QES. It is hoped that this will inform appropriate selection of QES approaches

When and how do 'effective' interventions need to be adapted and/or re-evaluated in new contexts? The need for guidance

No abstract available

The need for a complex systems model of evidence for public health

Despite major investment in both research and policy, many pressing contemporary public health challenges remain. To date, the evidence underpinning responses to these challenges has largely been generated by tools and methods that were developed to answer questions about the effectiveness of clinical interventions, and as such are grounded in linear models of cause and effect. Identification, implementation, and evaluation of effective responses to major public health challenges require a wider set of approaches1,2 and a focus on complex systems.This work was funded by a grant from The Health Foundation (London, UK) that supported HR, KG, and NS. HR was also supported by the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) North Thames at Bart's Health NHS Trust. LM is supported by the UK Medical Research Council ( MC_UU_12017/14 ) and the Chief Scientist Office ( SPHSU14 ). MW is funded in part by the UK NIHR as Director of its Public Health Research Programme

Child mortality from solid-fuel use in India: a nationally-representative case-control study

Abstract Background Most households in low and middle income countries, including in India, use solid fuels (coal/coke/lignite, firewood, dung, and crop residue) for cooking and heating. Such fuels increase child mortality, chiefly from acute respiratory infection. There are, however, few direct estimates of the impact of solid fuel on child mortality in India. Methods We compared household solid fuel use in 1998 between 6790 child deaths, from all causes, in the previous year and 609 601 living children living in 1.1 million nationally-representative homes in India. Analyses were stratified by child's gender, age (neonatal, post-neonatal, 1-4 years) and colder versus warmer states. We also examined the association of solid fuel to non-fatal pneumonias. Results Solid fuel use was very common (87% in households with child deaths and 77% in households with living children). After adjustment for demographic factors and living conditions, solid-fuel use significantly increase child deaths at ages 1-4 (prevalence ratio (PR) boys: 1.30, 95%CI 1.08-1.56; girls: 1.33, 95%CI 1.12-1.58). More girls than boys died from exposure to solid fuels. Solid fuel use was also associated with non-fatal pneumonia (boys: PR 1.54 95%CI 1.01-2.35; girls: PR 1.94 95%CI 1.13-3.33). Conclusions Child mortality risks, from all causes, due to solid fuel exposure were lower than previously, but as exposure was common solid, fuel caused 6% of all deaths at ages 0-4, 20% of deaths at ages 1-4 or 128 000 child deaths in India in 2004. Solid fuel use has declined only modestly in the last decade. Aside from reducing exposure, complementary strategies such as immunization and treatment could also reduce child mortality from acute respiratory infections