Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2010

Open Access 01-12-2010 | Study protocol

Using a realist approach to evaluate smoking cessation interventions targeting pregnant women and young people

Authors: Flora CG Douglas, Denise A Gray, Edwin R van Teijlingen

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

This paper describes a study protocol designed to evaluate a programme of smoking cessation interventions targeting pregnant women and young people living in urban and rural locations in Northeast Scotland. The study design was developed on so-called 'realist' evaluation principles, which are concerned with the implementation of interventions as well as their outcomes.

Methods/design

A two-phased study was designed based on the Theory of Change (TOC) using mixed methods to assess both process and outcome factors. The study was designed with input from the relevant stakeholders. The mixed-methods approach consists of semi-structured interviews with planners, service providers, service users and non-users. These qualitative interviews will be analysed using a thematic framework approach. The quantitative element of the study will include the analysis of routinely collected data and specific project monitoring data, such as data on service engagement, service use, quit rates and changes in smoking status.

Discussion

The process of involving key stakeholders was conducted using logic modelling and TOC tools. Engaging stakeholders, including those responsible for funding, developing and delivering, and those intended to benefit from interventions aimed at them, in their evaluation design, are considered by many to increase the validity and rigour of the subsequent evidence generated. This study is intended to determine not only the components and processes, but also the possible effectiveness of this set of health interventions, and contribute to the evidence base about smoking cessation interventions aimed at priority groups in Scotland. It is also anticipated that this study will contribute to the ongoing debate about the role and challenges of 'realist' evaluation approaches in general, and the utility of logic modelling and TOC approaches in particular, for evaluation of complex health interventions.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Scottish Executive: The Smoking, Health and Social Care (Scotland) Act 2005, Part 1. Edinburgh. 2005 Scottish Executive: The Smoking, Health and Social Care (Scotland) Act 2005, Part 1. Edinburgh. 2005
2.
go back to reference Abma TA: Responsive evaluation in health promotion: its value for ambiguous contexts. Health Promotion International. 2005, 20 (4): 391-397. 10.1093/heapro/dai013.CrossRefPubMed Abma TA: Responsive evaluation in health promotion: its value for ambiguous contexts. Health Promotion International. 2005, 20 (4): 391-397. 10.1093/heapro/dai013.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Judge K, Bauld L: Strong theory, flexible methods: evaluating complex community-based initiatives. Critical Public Health. 2001, 11 (1): 20-38.CrossRef Judge K, Bauld L: Strong theory, flexible methods: evaluating complex community-based initiatives. Critical Public Health. 2001, 11 (1): 20-38.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Pawson R, Tilley N: Realistic Evaluation. 1997, Sage Publications Inc Pawson R, Tilley N: Realistic Evaluation. 1997, Sage Publications Inc
5.
go back to reference Rootman I, Goodstadt M, Potvin L, Springett J: A framework for health promotion evaluation. Edited by: Rootman I, Goodstadt M, Hyndman B, McQueen DV, Potvin L, Springett J, et al. 2001, Evaluation in health promotion: Principles and prespectives: World Health Organisation, 7-38. Rootman I, Goodstadt M, Potvin L, Springett J: A framework for health promotion evaluation. Edited by: Rootman I, Goodstadt M, Hyndman B, McQueen DV, Potvin L, Springett J, et al. 2001, Evaluation in health promotion: Principles and prespectives: World Health Organisation, 7-38.
6.
go back to reference World Health Organisation: Health Promotion Evaluation: Recommendations to Policymakers. 1998 World Health Organisation: Health Promotion Evaluation: Recommendations to Policymakers. 1998
7.
go back to reference Sridharan S, Campbell B, Zinzow H: Developing a Stakeholder-Driven Anticipated Timeline of Impact for Evaluation of Social Programs. American Journal of Evaluation. 2006, 27 (2): 148-162. 10.1177/1098214006287990.CrossRef Sridharan S, Campbell B, Zinzow H: Developing a Stakeholder-Driven Anticipated Timeline of Impact for Evaluation of Social Programs. American Journal of Evaluation. 2006, 27 (2): 148-162. 10.1177/1098214006287990.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference BMRB Social Research: Scottish Schools Adolescent Lifestyle and Substance Use Survey (SALSUS) - National Report 2006. 2006 BMRB Social Research: Scottish Schools Adolescent Lifestyle and Substance Use Survey (SALSUS) - National Report 2006. 2006
10.
go back to reference Scottish Executive: A Breath of Fresh Air for Scotland Improving Scotland's Health: The Challenge Tobacco Control Action Plan. 2004, Scottish Executive Scottish Executive: A Breath of Fresh Air for Scotland Improving Scotland's Health: The Challenge Tobacco Control Action Plan. 2004, Scottish Executive
11.
go back to reference NHS Health Scotland and ASH Scotland: Reducing Smoking and Tobacco-Related Harm - A Key to Transforming Scotland's Health. 2003 NHS Health Scotland and ASH Scotland: Reducing Smoking and Tobacco-Related Harm - A Key to Transforming Scotland's Health. 2003
12.
go back to reference Connelly H, Finnie A, Rumbles A: Stop for Life: Final Project Report. 2007 Connelly H, Finnie A, Rumbles A: Stop for Life: Final Project Report. 2007
13.
go back to reference McCurry N, Thompson K, Parahoo K, O'Doherty E, Doherty A: Pregnant women's perception of the implementation of smoking cessation advice. Health Educ J. 2002, 61 (1): 20-31. 10.1177/001789690206100103.CrossRef McCurry N, Thompson K, Parahoo K, O'Doherty E, Doherty A: Pregnant women's perception of the implementation of smoking cessation advice. Health Educ J. 2002, 61 (1): 20-31. 10.1177/001789690206100103.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference NHS National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: Smoking cessation services in primary care, pharmacies, local authorities and workplaces, particularly for manual working groups, pregnant women and hard to reach communities. 2008 NHS National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: Smoking cessation services in primary care, pharmacies, local authorities and workplaces, particularly for manual working groups, pregnant women and hard to reach communities. 2008
15.
go back to reference Gnich W, Sheehy C, Amos A, Bitel M, Platt S: A Scotland-wide pilot programme of smoking cessation services for young people: process and outcome evaluation. Addiction. 2008, 103 (11): 1866-1874. 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02316.x.CrossRefPubMed Gnich W, Sheehy C, Amos A, Bitel M, Platt S: A Scotland-wide pilot programme of smoking cessation services for young people: process and outcome evaluation. Addiction. 2008, 103 (11): 1866-1874. 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02316.x.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference MacDonald S, Rothwell H, Moore L: Getting it right: designing adolescent-centred smoking cessation services. Addiction. 2007, 102 (7): 1147-1150. 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2007.01851.x.CrossRefPubMed MacDonald S, Rothwell H, Moore L: Getting it right: designing adolescent-centred smoking cessation services. Addiction. 2007, 102 (7): 1147-1150. 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2007.01851.x.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference NHS Health Scotland and ASH Scotland: Designing and delivering smoking cessation services for young people: Lessons from the pilot programme in Scotland. 2007 NHS Health Scotland and ASH Scotland: Designing and delivering smoking cessation services for young people: Lessons from the pilot programme in Scotland. 2007
18.
go back to reference Murray RL, Bauld L, Hackshaw LE, McNeill A: Improving access to smoking cessation services for disadvantaged groups: a systematic review. Journal of Public Health. 2009, 31 (2): 258-277. 10.1093/pubmed/fdp008.CrossRefPubMed Murray RL, Bauld L, Hackshaw LE, McNeill A: Improving access to smoking cessation services for disadvantaged groups: a systematic review. Journal of Public Health. 2009, 31 (2): 258-277. 10.1093/pubmed/fdp008.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Roddy E, Antoniak M, Britton J, Molyneux A, Lewis S: Barriers and motivators to gaining access to smoking cessation services amongst deprived smokers - a qualitative study. BMC Health Services Research. 2006, 6 (1): 147-10.1186/1472-6963-6-147.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Roddy E, Antoniak M, Britton J, Molyneux A, Lewis S: Barriers and motivators to gaining access to smoking cessation services amongst deprived smokers - a qualitative study. BMC Health Services Research. 2006, 6 (1): 147-10.1186/1472-6963-6-147.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
go back to reference Pound E, Coleman T, Adams C, Bauld L, Ferguson J: Targeting smokers in priority groups: the influence of government targets and policy statements. Addiction. 2005, 100 (s2): 28-35. 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2005.01025.x.CrossRefPubMed Pound E, Coleman T, Adams C, Bauld L, Ferguson J: Targeting smokers in priority groups: the influence of government targets and policy statements. Addiction. 2005, 100 (s2): 28-35. 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2005.01025.x.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Coote A, Allen J, Woodhead D: Finding Out what Works: Building Knowledge about Complex, Community-based Initiatives. 2004, London: The King's Fund Coote A, Allen J, Woodhead D: Finding Out what Works: Building Knowledge about Complex, Community-based Initiatives. 2004, London: The King's Fund
22.
go back to reference Rychetnik L, Frommer M, Hawe P, Shiell A: Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions. J.Epidemiol.Community Health. 2002, 56 (2): 119-127. 10.1136/jech.56.2.119.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Rychetnik L, Frommer M, Hawe P, Shiell A: Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions. J.Epidemiol.Community Health. 2002, 56 (2): 119-127. 10.1136/jech.56.2.119.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Nutbeam D: Evaluating health promotion - progress, problems and solutions. Health Promot Int. 1998, 13 (1): 27-44. 10.1093/heapro/13.1.27.CrossRef Nutbeam D: Evaluating health promotion - progress, problems and solutions. Health Promot Int. 1998, 13 (1): 27-44. 10.1093/heapro/13.1.27.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Kelly MP, Stewart E, Morgan A, Killoran A, Fischer A, Threlfall A, et al: A conceptual framework for public health: NICE's emerging approach. Public Health. 2009, 123 (1): e14-e20. 10.1016/j.puhe.2008.10.031.CrossRefPubMed Kelly MP, Stewart E, Morgan A, Killoran A, Fischer A, Threlfall A, et al: A conceptual framework for public health: NICE's emerging approach. Public Health. 2009, 123 (1): e14-e20. 10.1016/j.puhe.2008.10.031.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference NHS National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: Behaviour change at population, community and individual levels. 2007 NHS National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: Behaviour change at population, community and individual levels. 2007
26.
go back to reference Bonner L: Using theory-based evaluation to build evidence-based health and social care policy and practice. Critical Public Health. 2003, 13 (1): 77-92. 10.1080/0958159031000100224.CrossRef Bonner L: Using theory-based evaluation to build evidence-based health and social care policy and practice. Critical Public Health. 2003, 13 (1): 77-92. 10.1080/0958159031000100224.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Tones K: Beyond the randomized controlled trial: a case for 'judicial review'. Health Educ Res. 1997, 12 (2): 161-10.1093/her/12.2.161.CrossRef Tones K: Beyond the randomized controlled trial: a case for 'judicial review'. Health Educ Res. 1997, 12 (2): 161-10.1093/her/12.2.161.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M: Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. Br Med J. 2008, 337: a1655-10.1136/bmj.a1655.CrossRef Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M: Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. Br Med J. 2008, 337: a1655-10.1136/bmj.a1655.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Tannahill A: Beyond evidence--to ethics: a decision-making framework for health promotion, public health and health improvement. Health Promot Int. 2008, 23 (4): 380-390. 10.1093/heapro/dan032.CrossRefPubMed Tannahill A: Beyond evidence--to ethics: a decision-making framework for health promotion, public health and health improvement. Health Promot Int. 2008, 23 (4): 380-390. 10.1093/heapro/dan032.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM: Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health. 1999, 89 (9): 1322-1327. 10.2105/AJPH.89.9.1322.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM: Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health. 1999, 89 (9): 1322-1327. 10.2105/AJPH.89.9.1322.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
go back to reference Haw SJ, Gruer L, Amos A, Currie C, Fischbacher C, Fong GT, et al: Legislation on smoking in enclosed public places in Scotland: how will we evaluate the impact?. Journal of Public Health. 2006, 28 (1): 24-30. 10.1093/pubmed/fdi080.CrossRefPubMed Haw SJ, Gruer L, Amos A, Currie C, Fischbacher C, Fong GT, et al: Legislation on smoking in enclosed public places in Scotland: how will we evaluate the impact?. Journal of Public Health. 2006, 28 (1): 24-30. 10.1093/pubmed/fdi080.CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Green J, South J: Evaluation. 2006, Open University Press Green J, South J: Evaluation. 2006, Open University Press
33.
go back to reference Tones K: Evaluating health promotion: a tale of three errors. Patient Educ Couns. 2000, 39 (2-3): 227-236. 10.1016/S0738-3991(99)00035-X.CrossRefPubMed Tones K: Evaluating health promotion: a tale of three errors. Patient Educ Couns. 2000, 39 (2-3): 227-236. 10.1016/S0738-3991(99)00035-X.CrossRefPubMed
34.
go back to reference Owen J, Rogers P: Program evaluation: Forms and approaches. 1999, London: SageCrossRef Owen J, Rogers P: Program evaluation: Forms and approaches. 1999, London: SageCrossRef
35.
go back to reference Wimbush E, Watson J: An evaluation framework for health promotion: Theory, quality and effectiveness. Evaluation. 2000, 6 (3): 301-321.CrossRef Wimbush E, Watson J: An evaluation framework for health promotion: Theory, quality and effectiveness. Evaluation. 2000, 6 (3): 301-321.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Wadsworth Y: Everyday evaluation on the run. 1997, Australia: Allen & Unwin Wadsworth Y: Everyday evaluation on the run. 1997, Australia: Allen & Unwin
37.
go back to reference Kubisch A, Brown P, Chaskin R, Hirota J, Joseph M, Richman H, et al: Voices from the field: Learning from comprehensive community initiatives. 1997 Kubisch A, Brown P, Chaskin R, Hirota J, Joseph M, Richman H, et al: Voices from the field: Learning from comprehensive community initiatives. 1997
38.
go back to reference Connell JP, Kubisch AC: Applying a theory of change approach to the evaluation of comprehensive community initiatives: Progress, prospects and problems. Theory, Measurement, and Analysis. 1998, Washington, DC: Aspen Institute Connell JP, Kubisch AC: Applying a theory of change approach to the evaluation of comprehensive community initiatives: Progress, prospects and problems. Theory, Measurement, and Analysis. 1998, Washington, DC: Aspen Institute
39.
go back to reference Kellogg WK: Logic Model Development Guide. 2004, Michigan: WK Kellogg Foundation Kellogg WK: Logic Model Development Guide. 2004, Michigan: WK Kellogg Foundation
40.
go back to reference Cresswell JW: Chapter 11: Mixed methods procedures. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. 2003, Thousand Oaks: Sage, 208-227. 2 Cresswell JW: Chapter 11: Mixed methods procedures. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. 2003, Thousand Oaks: Sage, 208-227. 2
42.
go back to reference Ritchie J, Lewis J: Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. 2003, London: Sage Publications Inc Ritchie J, Lewis J: Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. 2003, London: Sage Publications Inc
43.
44.
go back to reference Strauss AL, Corbin JM: Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 1998, CA: Sage Publications Inc Strauss AL, Corbin JM: Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 1998, CA: Sage Publications Inc
45.
go back to reference Van Teijlingen E, Forrest K: The range of qualitative research methods in family planning and reproductive health care. Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care. 2004, 30: 171-173. 10.1783/1471189041261519.CrossRefPubMed Van Teijlingen E, Forrest K: The range of qualitative research methods in family planning and reproductive health care. Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care. 2004, 30: 171-173. 10.1783/1471189041261519.CrossRefPubMed
46.
go back to reference NHS National Patient Safety Agency: Guidance on information sheets and consent forms. Version 3.2 National Research Ethics Service. 2007 NHS National Patient Safety Agency: Guidance on information sheets and consent forms. Version 3.2 National Research Ethics Service. 2007
Metadata
Title
Using a realist approach to evaluate smoking cessation interventions targeting pregnant women and young people
Authors
Flora CG Douglas
Denise A Gray
Edwin R van Teijlingen
Publication date
01-12-2010
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2010
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-10-49

Other articles of this Issue 1/2010

BMC Health Services Research 1/2010 Go to the issue