ArticlePloS one2024
The implementation of an integrated workplace health promotion program in Dutch organizations - A mixed methods process evaluation.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo gain insight into 1) the degree of implementation of an integrated workplace health promotion program (WHPP) 2) the perceptions of employers and employees regarding an integrated WHPP and 3) the contextual factors that hindered or enhanced implementation.
methodsData were collected by means of questionnaires, interviews among 19 employees, supervisors and HR-professionals, monitoring charts and observations at 6-10 months after the start of the implementation of the integrated WHPP. To evaluate the implementation process, ten process indicators from the evaluation frameworks of Nielsen & Randall and Wierenga were assessed. Descriptive analyses were performed for the process indicators as measured by questionnaires, monitoring charts and observations. Interviews with employers and employees were recorded, transcribed and then coded by two researchers independently by means of thematic coding.
resultsThe results cover the following topics: implemented activities, the working group, engagement of employees, the role of management and policy and organizational preconditions. Although the criteria of the WHPP were not completely met, various activities were implemented in all participating organizations. Working groups consisting of Human Resources professionals, supervisors and employees, who selected and implemented activities, were composed within each organization. 22% of the employees did not feel involved in the implementation process. The absence of organizational policies regarding WHP hampered implementation. Organizations had the intention to continue with the integrated WHPP, which requires sufficient time and budget.
conclusionsThe implementation of the integrated WHPP appeared to be challenging and complex. Working groups indicated that they made the first important steps in integrating WHP in their organization and had the intention to continue with the implementation. However, to increase the impact, employers and employees should have the opportunity to implement and participate in WHP. Hence, organizational policies regarding WHP and active support of higher management are expected to be essential.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.