Process evaluations of health-promotion interventions in sports settings: a systematic review

Author:

Lim Angie S X1ORCID,Schweickle Matthew J1,Liddelow Caitlin1ORCID,Liddle Sarah K2,Vella Stewart A1

Affiliation:

1. Global Alliance for Mental Health and Sport, School of Psychology, University of Wollongong , Northfields Avenue, Wollongong, New South Wales, 2522 , Australia

2. Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University , 18 Innovation Walk, Clayton, Victoria, 3800 , Australia

Abstract

Abstract Sports settings have been identified as an ideal place to conduct complex multi-level health-promotion interventions, with the potential to engage a broad audience. Whilst the benefits of delivering health-promotion interventions in sports settings are well documented, such interventions’ real-world implementation and success must be better understood. Process evaluations can be conducted to provide information related to an intervention’s fidelity, replication, scaling, adoption, and the underlying mechanisms driving outcomes. This systematic review summarizes how process evaluations of health-promotion interventions are conducted in sports settings and highlight facilitators and barriers to health-promotion intervention delivery using narrative synthesis. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, searches included original peer-reviewed articles from inception—January 2023. We searched eight electronic databases: Academic Search Complete; MEDLINE, PsycARTICLES; PsycINFO; SPORTSDiscus with Full Text; MEDLINE; SCOPUS; Pub Med, and Pro Quest Central. Thirty-two studies were included. Findings suggest that most process evaluations of health-promotion interventions have acknowledged the inherent complexity of sports settings, and investigated factors that explain their intervention’s success (e.g. trust building, engagement). However, poor use of process evaluation frameworks or guidelines resulted in wide variations of how process evaluations are conducted and reported, which made findings difficult to integrate and standardize with consistency. Accordingly, this review provides a guide on how future process evaluations can be conducted to improve health-promotion interventions’ transparency, replicability and reliability in real-world settings.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health (social science)

Reference66 articles.

1. How we design feasibility studies;Bowen;American Journal of Preventive Medicine,2009

2. Enhancing functional recovery for young people recovering from first episode psychosis via sport-based life skills training: outcomes of a feasibility and pilot study;Brooke;Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine,2022

3. An uncontrolled pilot feasibility trial of an intuitive eating intervention for college women with disordered eating delivered through group and guided self-help modalities;Burnette;International Journal of Eating Disorders,2020

4. Exposing the key functions of a complex intervention for shared care in mental health: case study of a process evaluation;Byng;BMC Health Services Research,2008

5. Guidance notes for registering a systematic review protocol with PROSPERO;Center for Reviews and Dissemination;National Institute for Health Research,2016

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3