↓ Skip to main content

Translating a child care based intervention for online delivery: development and randomized pilot study of Go NAPSACC

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
136 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
Translating a child care based intervention for online delivery: development and randomized pilot study of Go NAPSACC
Published in
BMC Public Health, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4898-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dianne S. Ward, Amber E. Vaughn, Stephanie Mazzucca, Regan Burney

Abstract

As part of childhood obesity prevention initiatives, Early Care and Education (ECE) programs are being asked to implement evidence-based strategies that promote healthier eating and physical activity habits in children. Translation of evidence-based interventions into real world ECE settings often encounter barriers, including time constraints, lack of easy-to-use tools, and inflexible intervention content. This study describes translation of an evidence-based program (NAPSACC) into an online format (Go NAPSACC) and a randomized pilot study evaluating its impact on centers' nutrition environments. Go NAPSACC retained core elements and implementation strategies from the original program, but translated tools into an online, self-directed format using extensive input from the ECE community. For the pilot, local technical assistance (TA) agencies facilitated recruitment of 33 centers, which were randomized to immediate (intervention, n = 18) or delayed (control, n = 15) access groups. Center directors were oriented on Go NAPSACC tools by their local TA providers (after being trained by researchers), after which they implemented Go NAPSACC independently with minimal TA support. The Environment and Policy Assessment and Observation instrument (self-report), collected prior to and following the 4-month intervention period, was used to assess impact on centers' nutrition environments. Process data were also collected from a sample of directors and all TA providers to evaluate program usability and implementation. Demographic characteristics of intervention and control centers were similar. Two centers did not complete follow-up measures, leaving 17 intervention and 14 control centers in the analytic sample. Between baseline and follow-up, intervention centers improved overall nutrition scores (Cohen's d effect size = 0.73, p = 0.15), as well as scores for foods (effect size = 0.74, p = 0.16), beverages (effect size = 0.54, p = 0.06), and menus (effect size = 0.73, p = 0.08), but changes were not statistically significant. Core elements of NAPSACC were effectively translated into online tools and successfully implemented by center directors. Results suggest that the online program may have retained its ability to drive change in centers' nutrition environments using a streamlined, self-directed, and flexible implementation approach. Results need to be confirmed in a larger more definitive trial. NCT02889198 (retrospectively registered).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 136 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 22%
Student > Bachelor 14 10%
Researcher 14 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Other 8 6%
Other 26 19%
Unknown 34 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 29 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 16%
Social Sciences 11 8%
Psychology 8 6%
Sports and Recreations 6 4%
Other 21 15%
Unknown 39 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 22 November 2017.
All research outputs
#10,797,936
of 12,177,594 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,716
of 8,238 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#279,873
of 336,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#213
of 236 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,177,594 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,238 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 336,524 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 236 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.