↓ Skip to main content

Adoption, reach, and implementation of a cancer education intervention in African American churches

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

6 tweeters
1 Facebook page


38 Dimensions

Readers on

122 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.
Adoption, reach, and implementation of a cancer education intervention in African American churches
Published in
Implementation Science, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13012-017-0566-z
Pubmed ID

Sherie Lou Zara Santos, Erin K. Tagai, Mary Ann Scheirer, Janice Bowie, Muhiuddin Haider, Jimmie Slade, Min Qi Wang, Cheryl L. Holt


Use of technology is increasing in health promotion and has continued growth potential in intervention research. Guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework, this paper reports on the adoption, reach, and implementation of Project HEAL (Health through Early Awareness and Learning)-a community-based implementation trial of a cancer educational intervention in 14 African American churches. We compare adoption, reach, and implementation at the organizational and participant level for churches in which lay peer community health advisors (CHAs) were trained using traditional classroom didactic methods compared with a new online system. Fifteen churches were randomized to one of two study groups in which two CHAs per church were trained through either classroom ("Traditional"; n = 16 CHAs in 8 churches) or web-based ("Technology"; n = 14 CHAs in 7 churches) training methods. Once trained and certified, all CHAs conducted a series of three group educational workshops in their churches on cancer early detection (breast, prostate, and colorectal). Adoption, reach, and implementation were assessed using multiple data sources including church-level data, participant engagement in the workshops, and study staff observations of CHA performance. The project had a 41% overall adoption rate at the church level. In terms of reach, a total of 375 participants enrolled in Project HEAL-226 participants in the Traditional group (43% reach) and 149 in the Technology group (21% reach; p < .10). Implementation was evaluated in terms of adherence, dosage, and quality. All churches fully completed the three workshops; however, the Traditional churches took somewhat longer (M = 84 days) to complete the workshop series than churches in the Technology group (M = 64 days). Other implementation outcomes were comparable between both the Traditional and Technology groups (p > .05). Overall, the Project HEAL intervention had reasonable adoption, though reach could have been better. Implementation was strong across both study groups, suggesting the promise of using web-based methods to disseminate and implement evidence-based interventions in faith-based settings and other areas where community health educators work to eliminate health disparities.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ghana 1 <1%
Unknown 121 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 16%
Researcher 17 14%
Student > Master 16 13%
Student > Bachelor 14 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 10%
Other 22 18%
Unknown 21 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 16%
Social Sciences 15 12%
Psychology 12 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Other 10 8%
Unknown 35 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 09 October 2017.
All research outputs
of 15,920,152 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
of 1,505 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 262,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,920,152 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,505 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 262,561 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.