Engaging stakeholders in the co-development of programs or interventions using Intervention Mapping: A scoping review.
<h4>Background</h4>Health care innovations tailored to stakeholder context are more readily adopted. This study aimed to describe how Intervention Mapping (IM) was used to design health care innovations and how stakeholders were involved.<h4>Methods</h4>A scoping review was c...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2018-01-01
|
| Series: | PLoS ONE |
| Online Access: | https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0209826&type=printable |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832540050856869888 |
|---|---|
| author | Umair Majid Claire Kim Albina Cako Anna R Gagliardi |
| author_facet | Umair Majid Claire Kim Albina Cako Anna R Gagliardi |
| author_sort | Umair Majid |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | <h4>Background</h4>Health care innovations tailored to stakeholder context are more readily adopted. This study aimed to describe how Intervention Mapping (IM) was used to design health care innovations and how stakeholders were involved.<h4>Methods</h4>A scoping review was conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus and Science Citation Index were searched from 2008 to November 2017. English language studies that used or cited Intervention Mapping were eligible. Screening and data extraction were done in triplicate. Summary statistics were used to describe study characteristics, IM steps employed, and stakeholder involvement.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 852 studies were identified, 449 were unique, and 333 were excluded based on title and abstracts, 116 full-text articles were considered and 61 articles representing 60 studies from 13 countries for a variety of clinical issues were included. The number of studies published per year increased since 2008 and doubled in 2016 and 2017. The majority of studies employed multiple research methods (76.7%) and all 6 IM steps (73.3%). Resulting programs/interventions were single (55.4%) or multifaceted (46.4%), and 60.7% were pilot-tested. Programs or interventions were largely educational material or meetings, and were targeted to patients (70.2%), clinicians (14.0%) or both (15.8%). Studies provided few details about current or planned evaluation. Of the 4 (9.3%) studies that reported impact or outcomes, 3 achieved positive improvements in patient or professional behaviour or patient outcomes. Many studies (28.3%) did not involve stakeholders. Those that did (71.7%) often involved a combination of patients, clinicians, and community organizations. However, less than half (48.8%) described how they were engaged. Most often stakeholders were committee members and provide feedback on program or intervention content or format.<h4>Conclusions</h4>It is unclear if use of IM or stakeholder engagement in IM consistently results in effective programs or interventions. Those employing IM should report how stakeholders were involved in each IM step and how involvement influenced program or intervention design. They should also report the details or absence of planned evaluation. Future research should investigate how to optimize stakeholder engagement in IM, and whether use of IM itself or stakeholder engagement in IM are positively associated with effective programs or interventions. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-6eaf29e5fde74100bc80499e9fce7048 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1932-6203 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2018-01-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS ONE |
| spelling | doaj-art-6eaf29e5fde74100bc80499e9fce70482025-02-05T05:33:08ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032018-01-011312e020982610.1371/journal.pone.0209826Engaging stakeholders in the co-development of programs or interventions using Intervention Mapping: A scoping review.Umair MajidClaire KimAlbina CakoAnna R Gagliardi<h4>Background</h4>Health care innovations tailored to stakeholder context are more readily adopted. This study aimed to describe how Intervention Mapping (IM) was used to design health care innovations and how stakeholders were involved.<h4>Methods</h4>A scoping review was conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus and Science Citation Index were searched from 2008 to November 2017. English language studies that used or cited Intervention Mapping were eligible. Screening and data extraction were done in triplicate. Summary statistics were used to describe study characteristics, IM steps employed, and stakeholder involvement.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 852 studies were identified, 449 were unique, and 333 were excluded based on title and abstracts, 116 full-text articles were considered and 61 articles representing 60 studies from 13 countries for a variety of clinical issues were included. The number of studies published per year increased since 2008 and doubled in 2016 and 2017. The majority of studies employed multiple research methods (76.7%) and all 6 IM steps (73.3%). Resulting programs/interventions were single (55.4%) or multifaceted (46.4%), and 60.7% were pilot-tested. Programs or interventions were largely educational material or meetings, and were targeted to patients (70.2%), clinicians (14.0%) or both (15.8%). Studies provided few details about current or planned evaluation. Of the 4 (9.3%) studies that reported impact or outcomes, 3 achieved positive improvements in patient or professional behaviour or patient outcomes. Many studies (28.3%) did not involve stakeholders. Those that did (71.7%) often involved a combination of patients, clinicians, and community organizations. However, less than half (48.8%) described how they were engaged. Most often stakeholders were committee members and provide feedback on program or intervention content or format.<h4>Conclusions</h4>It is unclear if use of IM or stakeholder engagement in IM consistently results in effective programs or interventions. Those employing IM should report how stakeholders were involved in each IM step and how involvement influenced program or intervention design. They should also report the details or absence of planned evaluation. Future research should investigate how to optimize stakeholder engagement in IM, and whether use of IM itself or stakeholder engagement in IM are positively associated with effective programs or interventions.https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0209826&type=printable |
| spellingShingle | Umair Majid Claire Kim Albina Cako Anna R Gagliardi Engaging stakeholders in the co-development of programs or interventions using Intervention Mapping: A scoping review. PLoS ONE |
| title | Engaging stakeholders in the co-development of programs or interventions using Intervention Mapping: A scoping review. |
| title_full | Engaging stakeholders in the co-development of programs or interventions using Intervention Mapping: A scoping review. |
| title_fullStr | Engaging stakeholders in the co-development of programs or interventions using Intervention Mapping: A scoping review. |
| title_full_unstemmed | Engaging stakeholders in the co-development of programs or interventions using Intervention Mapping: A scoping review. |
| title_short | Engaging stakeholders in the co-development of programs or interventions using Intervention Mapping: A scoping review. |
| title_sort | engaging stakeholders in the co development of programs or interventions using intervention mapping a scoping review |
| url | https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0209826&type=printable |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT umairmajid engagingstakeholdersinthecodevelopmentofprogramsorinterventionsusinginterventionmappingascopingreview AT clairekim engagingstakeholdersinthecodevelopmentofprogramsorinterventionsusinginterventionmappingascopingreview AT albinacako engagingstakeholdersinthecodevelopmentofprogramsorinterventionsusinginterventionmappingascopingreview AT annargagliardi engagingstakeholdersinthecodevelopmentofprogramsorinterventionsusinginterventionmappingascopingreview |