↓ Skip to main content

Process evaluation of an environmental health risk audit and action plan intervention to reduce alcohol related violence in licensed premises

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
Process evaluation of an environmental health risk audit and action plan intervention to reduce alcohol related violence in licensed premises
Published in
BMC Public Health, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3123-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Annie Williams, Simon C. Moore, Claire Shovelton, Laurence Moore, Simon Murphy

Abstract

Alcohol-related violence is associated with licensed premise environments and their management. There is a lack of evidence for effective interventions to address these, and there are significant barriers to implementation. This study aims to understand how development and implementation processes can facilitate intervention reach, fidelity and receipt and therefore provides key process data necessary to interpret the results of the randomised controlled trial conducted in parallel. A process evaluation, embedded within a randomised controlled trial. Intervention development and implementation were assessed via focus groups (n = 2) and semi-structured interviews (n = 22) with Environmental Health Practitioners (EHPs). Reach and fidelity were assessed via routinely collected intervention data, which was was collected from 276 licenced premises across Wales, UK. Case study semi-structured interviews with licensed premises proprietors (n = 30) explored intervention receipt. Intervention co-production with senior EHPs facilitated organisational adoption and implementation. Training events for EHPs played an important role in addressing wider organisational concerns regarding partnership working and the contextual integration of the intervention. EHPs delivered the intervention to 98 % of intervention premises; 35 % of premises should have received a follow up enforcement visit, however EHP confidence in dealing with alcohol risk factors meant only 7 % of premises received one. Premises therefore received a similar intervention dose regardless of baseline risk. Intervention receipt appeared to be greatest in premises with an existing commitment to prevention and those in urban environments. The study suggests that a collaborative approach to the development and diffusion of interventions is associated with high levels of organisational adoption, implementation and reach. However, the lack of enforcement visits represents implementation failure for a key mechanism of action that is likely to influence intervention effectiveness. To be effective, any future intervention may require a longer implementation period to develop EHP confidence in using enforcement approaches in this area and multiagency enforcement support, which includes the police, to deliver an adequate intervention dose.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Master 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 14 19%
Unknown 23 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 18%
Psychology 11 15%
Social Sciences 11 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 27 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 27 October 2016.
All research outputs
#2,404,950
of 23,299,593 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,760
of 15,190 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,212
of 339,701 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#59
of 188 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,299,593 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,190 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
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 339,701 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 188 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.