Literature DB >> 23079259

Lessons from a mixed-methods approach to evaluating Active Living by Design.

Ross C Brownson1, Laura K Brennan, Kelly R Evenson, Laura C Leviton.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Beginning in 2003, Active Living by Design (ALbD) established innovative approaches across 25 communities to increase physical activity through community design, public policies, programming, and communication strategies.
PURPOSE: The complexity of the ALbD projects called for a mixed-methods evaluation to understand implementation as well as perceived and actual impacts of these efforts.
METHODS: Six primary evaluation methods addressed three primary aims: (1) to assess impacts of physical projects and policy changes on community environments; (2) to document intervention strategies implemented, as well as intended and unintended consequences; and (3) to identify strengths and challenges in planning, developing, and implementing interventions. The ALbD evaluation included cross-site comparisons and more in-depth case studies. This article describes the methods used to address the three aims.
RESULTS: Analysis of the strengths and challenges associated with the different methods, including partnership capacity surveys, Concept Mapping, an online progress reporting system, key informant interviews, focus groups, and photos and videos. Additional methods, including environmental audits and direct observation, were explored to specifically assess environmental changes. Several important challenges included the lack of baseline data, difficulty in evaluating natural experiments, the need for ongoing policy surveillance, and the need to capture longer-term endpoints.
CONCLUSIONS: The mixed-methods evaluation of ALbD advances implementation and evaluation science related to community-based efforts for promoting active living through identification of methods and measures to capture multicomponent and complex interventions as well as translation of a range of approaches to create community change across a variety of populations and settings.
Copyright © 2012 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23079259      PMCID: PMC4748728          DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2012.07.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Prev Med        ISSN: 0749-3797            Impact factor:   5.043


  40 in total

Review 1.  A review of collaborative partnerships as a strategy for improving community health.

Authors:  S T Roussos; S B Fawcett
Journal:  Annu Rev Public Health       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 21.981

Review 2.  A glossary for evidence based public health.

Authors:  Lucie Rychetnik; Penelope Hawe; Elizabeth Waters; Alexandra Barratt; Michael Frommer
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 3.710

3.  System for Observing Play and Recreation in Communities (SOPARC): Reliability and Feasibility Measures.

Authors:  Thomas L McKenzie; Deborah A Cohen; Amber Sehgal; Stephanie Williamson; Daniela Golinelli
Journal:  J Phys Act Health       Date:  2006-02

4.  Active Living by Design: building and sustaining a national program.

Authors:  Sarah L Strunk
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 5.043

Review 5.  Review of community-based research: assessing partnership approaches to improve public health.

Authors:  B A Israel; A J Schulz; E A Parker; A B Becker
Journal:  Annu Rev Public Health       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 21.981

Review 6.  Identifying and defining the dimensions of community capacity to provide a basis for measurement.

Authors:  R M Goodman; M A Speers; K McLeroy; S Fawcett; M Kegler; E Parker; S R Smith; T D Sterling; N Wallerstein
Journal:  Health Educ Behav       Date:  1998-06

7.  The concept mapping method. An alternative to focus group inquiry in general practice.

Authors:  D M Southern; R W Batterham; N J Appleby; D Young; D Dunt; R Guibert
Journal:  Aust Fam Physician       Date:  1999-01

8.  Linking science and policy through community-based participatory research to study and address health disparities.

Authors:  Meredith Minkler
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2010-02-10       Impact factor: 9.308

9.  Evaluation of Active Living by Design: implementation patterns across communities.

Authors:  Laura K Brennan; Ross C Brownson; Peter Hovmand
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 5.043

10.  Assessment for active living: harnessing the power of data-driven planning and action.

Authors:  Philip A Bors; Ross C Brownson; Laura K Brennan
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 5.043

View more
  8 in total

1.  Applying a mixed-methods evaluation to Healthy Kids, Healthy Communities.

Authors:  Ross C Brownson; Allison L Kemner; Laura K Brennan
Journal:  J Public Health Manag Pract       Date:  2015 May-Jun

2.  Evaluation of Active Living by Design: implementation patterns across communities.

Authors:  Laura K Brennan; Ross C Brownson; Peter Hovmand
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 5.043

3.  Assessment for active living: harnessing the power of data-driven planning and action.

Authors:  Philip A Bors; Ross C Brownson; Laura K Brennan
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 5.043

4.  Concept mapping: priority community strategies to create changes to support active living.

Authors:  Laura K Brennan; Ross C Brownson; Cheryl Kelly; Melissa K Ivey; Laura C Leviton
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 5.043

Review 5.  Understanding for whom, under what conditions, and how group-based physical activity interventions are successful: a realist review.

Authors:  Samantha M Harden; Desmond McEwan; Benjamin D Sylvester; Megan Kaulius; Geralyn Ruissen; Shauna M Burke; Paul A Estabrooks; Mark R Beauchamp
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2015-09-24       Impact factor: 3.295

Review 6.  Physical Activity and Public Health among People with Disabilities: Research Gaps and Recommendations.

Authors:  Gregory W Heath; David Levine
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-08-22       Impact factor: 4.614

7.  Mixed method evaluation of a community-based physical activity program using the RE-AIM framework: practical application in a real-world setting.

Authors:  Harriet Koorts; Fiona Gillison
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2015-11-06       Impact factor: 3.295

8.  Evaluation of a community-based, family focused healthy weights initiative using the RE-AIM framework.

Authors:  Mary E Jung; Jessica E Bourne; Heather L Gainforth
Journal:  Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act       Date:  2018-01-26       Impact factor: 6.457

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.