↓ Skip to main content

Assessing the fidelity of delivery of an intervention to increase attendance at the English Stop Smoking Services

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Assessing the fidelity of delivery of an intervention to increase attendance at the English Stop Smoking Services
Published in
Implementation Science, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13012-016-0498-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Molly Sweeney-Magee, Dimitra Kale, Simon Galton, Andrea Hamill, Hazel Gilbert, Sweeney-Magee, M, Kale, D, Galton, S, Hamill, A, Gilbert, H

Abstract

Implementation fidelity refers to the extent to which a proposed intervention is enacted as designed and is necessary to determine how much the intervention in question is the primary mechanism in any changes observed. Start2quit was a randomised controlled trial that aimed to improve attendance at the English Stop Smoking Service (SSS). The complex intervention combining computer-tailored personal risk letters and no-commitment ("taster") sessions aimed at encouraging attendance at the SSS doubled attendance at the SSS and significantly increased abstinence rates, although attendance and abstinence varied between participating SSSs. Assessment of the fidelity of the delivery of the taster sessions to the protocol was embedded into the trial and is the focus of this study. Eighteen SSSs participated in the study. Taster sessions were delivered by SSS advisors in the area. Of the 131 sessions delivered, 93 (71 %) were recorded and 41 (31.3 %) were selected for transcription and analysis. The taster session protocol contained 73 specified behaviours, which were independently classified into component behaviour change techniques (BCTs) using an established taxonomy for smoking cessation. All transcripts were coded by two authors with 25 % additionally coded by a third. The fidelity of each taster session was expressed as the percentage of overall protocol-specified behaviours that were delivered. Adherence to each BCT was measured as the number of behaviours applied by the advisors within each BCT divided by the total number classified within each. Adherence of protocol-specified behaviours was relatively high (median 71.23 %), though there was considerable variation (28.76 to 95.89 %) in individual sessions. Median fidelity to specific BCTs across sessions also varied from 50 to 100 %. Shorter sessions, sessions run jointly by two advisors, by female advisors, or by advisors aged 45 to 54 were associated with higher levels of adherence. There was no association between adherence and subsequent attendance at the SSS. These results suggest that the delivery of the intervention of this study is not likely to have been impacted by issues of fidelity. As such, we can have greater confidence that variability in the main outcome is not due to variability in SSS advisor adherence to the protocol of the taster sessions. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN76561916.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 42 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 28%
Researcher 8 19%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 4 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 13 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Sports and Recreations 2 5%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 8 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 March 2017.
All research outputs
#4,713,959
of 9,165,968 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#988
of 1,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,014
of 311,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#34
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,165,968 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.7. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,472 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.