The NEW Soul Study: Implementation and Evaluation Impact From the Secular Trend of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Journal of Public Health Management and Practice Pub Date : 2024-10-25 DOI:10.1097/PHH.0000000000002071
John A Bernhart, Gabrielle M Turner-McGrievy, Marty Davey, Nkechi Okpara, E Grace Harrell, Shiba Bailey, Sara Wilcox
{"title":"The NEW Soul Study: Implementation and Evaluation Impact From the Secular Trend of the COVID-19 Pandemic.","authors":"John A Bernhart, Gabrielle M Turner-McGrievy, Marty Davey, Nkechi Okpara, E Grace Harrell, Shiba Bailey, Sara Wilcox","doi":"10.1097/PHH.0000000000002071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>In process evaluation research, secular trends refer to external factors unrelated to an intervention that impact implementation. The COVID-19 pandemic was a secular trend that affected the implementation of the Nutritious Eating with Soul (NEW Soul) study.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This paper describes steps taken in modifying intervention delivery due to the secular trend of the pandemic. This paper also addresses process evaluation measures of dose delivered, dose received, and satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This study is a longitudinal study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The study took place in Columbia, SC, from 2018 to 2021.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>African American adults between 18 and 65 years old.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>The NEW Soul study, a dietary lifestyle intervention, lasted 24 months.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Process evaluation variables of dose delivered, dose received, and satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study team shifted intervention delivery and maintained the timeline of classes for participants and intervention activities. Dose delivered was higher in-person (7.0 out of 8) compared to online (6.4 out of 8; t = -3.92, P = .002). Attendance was higher in-person compared to online (t = 2.80, P = .006). Overall, satisfaction of the intervention was favorable in-person and online. Helpfulness of nutrition information in the class was rated lower online compared to in-person (t = 2.05, P = .04).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Even though the study team successfully shifted intervention delivery online, dose delivered was higher in-person. Evaluations of classes remained high across cohorts and for in-person and online classes. Future lifestyle interventions working with African American adults requires consistent flexibility in intervention delivery.</p>","PeriodicalId":47855,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Health Management and Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Health Management and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PHH.0000000000002071","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Context: In process evaluation research, secular trends refer to external factors unrelated to an intervention that impact implementation. The COVID-19 pandemic was a secular trend that affected the implementation of the Nutritious Eating with Soul (NEW Soul) study.

Objective: This paper describes steps taken in modifying intervention delivery due to the secular trend of the pandemic. This paper also addresses process evaluation measures of dose delivered, dose received, and satisfaction.

Design: This study is a longitudinal study.

Setting: The study took place in Columbia, SC, from 2018 to 2021.

Participants: African American adults between 18 and 65 years old.

Intervention: The NEW Soul study, a dietary lifestyle intervention, lasted 24 months.

Main outcome measures: Process evaluation variables of dose delivered, dose received, and satisfaction.

Results: The study team shifted intervention delivery and maintained the timeline of classes for participants and intervention activities. Dose delivered was higher in-person (7.0 out of 8) compared to online (6.4 out of 8; t = -3.92, P = .002). Attendance was higher in-person compared to online (t = 2.80, P = .006). Overall, satisfaction of the intervention was favorable in-person and online. Helpfulness of nutrition information in the class was rated lower online compared to in-person (t = 2.05, P = .04).

Conclusions: Even though the study team successfully shifted intervention delivery online, dose delivered was higher in-person. Evaluations of classes remained high across cohorts and for in-person and online classes. Future lifestyle interventions working with African American adults requires consistent flexibility in intervention delivery.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
新灵魂研究:从 COVID-19 大流行的世俗趋势看实施和评估的影响。
背景:在过程评估研究中,世俗趋势是指与干预措施无关的、影响实施的外部因素。COVID-19 大流行是影响 "有灵魂的营养饮食"(NEW Soul)研究实施的一个世俗趋势:本文介绍了因大流行病的世俗趋势而采取的修改干预措施的步骤。本文还讨论了对提供剂量、接受剂量和满意度的过程评估措施:本研究是一项纵向研究:研究于 2018 年至 2021 年在南卡罗来纳州哥伦比亚市进行:干预措施:新灵魂研究是一项饮食生活方式干预研究,为期 24 个月:主要结果测量:提供剂量、接受剂量和满意度的过程评估变量:研究小组改变了干预措施的实施方式,并保持了参与者的课程和干预活动的时间安排。与在线课程(6.4 分,满分 8 分;t = -3.92,P = .002)相比,面授课程的剂量更高(7.0 分,满分 8 分)。与在线干预相比,现场干预的出席率更高(t = 2.80,P = .006)。总的来说,现场和在线干预的满意度都很高。课堂营养信息的有用性在线评分低于现场评分(t = 2.05,P = .04):结论:尽管研究小组成功地将干预措施转移到了网上,但面对面授课的剂量更高。在不同的组群中,以及在面对面和在线课堂上,对课堂的评价仍然很高。未来针对非裔美国成年人的生活方式干预需要持续灵活的干预方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Public Health Management and Practice
Journal of Public Health Management and Practice PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
9.10%
发文量
287
期刊介绍: Journal of Public Health Management and Practice publishes articles which focus on evidence based public health practice and research. The journal is a bi-monthly peer-reviewed publication guided by a multidisciplinary editorial board of administrators, practitioners and scientists. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice publishes in a wide range of population health topics including research to practice; emergency preparedness; bioterrorism; infectious disease surveillance; environmental health; community health assessment, chronic disease prevention and health promotion, and academic-practice linkages.
期刊最新文献
Perceptions of Criticality and Frequency of Tasks by the Public Health Workforce, 2022. Real-Time Dashboard for Identifying Overdose Touchpoints in Indiana. Assessing Facility Readiness to Provide Equitable Birthing Care in New York State: A Baseline Survey. Training the Next Generation of Local Public Health Leaders: A Case Study of Community Health Organizers in Pennsylvania. Maintaining and Improving Virtual Call Centers for Public Health: The CUNY Recovery Corps Experience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1