ArticleBMC health services research2024
Co-developing a theory of change for a personalised multimodal cancer prehabilitation programme in South Wales.
Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvidence suggests that prehabilitation interventions, which optimise physical and mental health prior to treatment, can improve outcomes for surgical cancer patients and save costs to the health system through faster recovery and fewer complications. However, robust, theory-based evaluations of these programmes are needed. Using a theory of change (ToC) approach can guide evaluation plans by describing how and why a programme is expected to work. Theories of Change have not been developed for cancer prehabilitation programmes in the literature to date. This paper aims to provide an overview of the methodological steps we used to retrospectively construct a ToC for Prehab2Rehab (P2R), a cancer prehabilitation programme being implemented by the Cardiff and Vale University Health Board.
methodsWe used an iterative, participatory approach to develop the ToC. Following a literature review and document analysis, we facilitated a workshop with fourteen stakeholders from across the programme using a 'backwards mapping' approach. After the workshop, stakeholders had three additional opportunities to refine and validate a final working version of the ToC.
resultsOur process resulted in the effective and timely development of a ToC. The ToC captures how P2R's interventions or activities are expected to bring about short, medium and long-term outcomes that, collectively, should result in the overarching desired impacts of the programme, which were improved patient flow and reduced costs to the health system. The process of developing a ToC also enabled us to have a better understanding of the programme and build rapport with key stakeholders.
conclusionsThe ToC has guided the design of an evaluation that covers the complexity of P2R and will generate lessons for policy and clinical practice on supporting surgical cancer patients in Wales and beyond. We recommend that evaluators apply a ToC development process at the outset of evaluations to bring together stakeholders and enhance the utilisation of the findings. This paper details a pragmatic, efficient and replicable process that evaluators could adopt to develop a ToC. Theory-informed evaluations may provide better evidence to develop and refine cancer prehabilitation interventions and other complex public health interventions.
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.