Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38439155›Full record

ArticleGlobal health promotion2024

Developing a theory of change - the importance of rich process data and authors' insights into context, implementation and mechanisms.

Helen Elizabeth Denise Burchett, Rebecca S French, Sally Griffin, Málica de Melo, Joelma Joaquim Picardo, Dylan Kneale

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global health promotion, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Helen Elizabeth Denise BurchettDepartment of Public Health, Environments & Society, Faculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8380-2476
Rebecca S FrenchDepartment of Public Health, Environments & Society, Faculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Sally GriffinInternational Centre for Reproductive Health: Mozambique, Mozambique.
Málica de MeloInternational Centre for Reproductive Health: Mozambique, Mozambique.
Joelma Joaquim PicardoInternational Centre for Reproductive Health: Mozambique, Mozambique.
Dylan KnealeEPPI-Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTheories of change explaining how interventions work are increasingly important, yet the methods/data to develop these are less advanced than for evaluating effects.

methodsWe conducted a systematic evidence synthesis to develop a theory of change for structural adolescent contraception interventions. We reflect on the utility of the information provided in evaluation reports. FINDINGS/DISCUSSION: Few of the included evaluations presented their theory of change, or included rich, qualitative process data. Authors' descriptions of context and implementation, typically in introduction and discussion sections, were very useful. These helped to understand the intervention's context, how it was experienced and why or how it had the effect that it did. We recommend incorporating rich process evaluations into studies, and reporting contextual insights into the intervention's development, implementation and experience. We also recommend including these data and insights within syntheses that aim to develop theories of change.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalAdolescentContraceptionFemaleHealth PromotionHumansadolescentcontraceptionevaluationevidence synthesisprocess evaluation

Identifiers

PMID38439155
PMCPMC11568639

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.