Dataset Information

Social, economic, political, and geographical context that counts: meta-review of implementation determinants for policies promoting healthy diet and physical activity.

ABSTRACT:

Background

This meta-review investigated the context-related implementation determinants from seven domains (geographical, epidemiological, sociocultural, economic, ethics-related, political, and legal) that were systematically indicated as occurring during the implementation of obesity prevention policies targeting a healthy diet and a physically active lifestyle.

Methods

Data from nine databases and documentation of nine major stakeholders were searched for the purpose of this preregistered meta-review (#CRD42019133341). Context-related determinants were considered strongly supported if they were indicated in ≥60% of the reviews/stakeholder documents. The ROBIS tool and the Methodological Quality Checklist-SP were used to assess the quality-related risk of bias.

Results

Published reviews (k = 25) and stakeholder documents that reviewed the evidence of policy implementation (k = 17) were included. Across documents, the following six determinants from three context domains received strong support: economic resources at the macro (66.7% of analyzed documents) and meso/micro levels (71.4%); sociocultural context determinants at the meso/micro level, references to knowledge/beliefs/abilities of target groups (69.0%) and implementers (73.8%); political context determinants (interrelated policies supported in 71.4% of analyzed reviews/documents; policies within organizations, 69.0%).

Conclusions

These findings indicate that sociocultural, economic, and political contexts need to be accounted for when formulating plans for the implementation of a healthy diet and physical activity/sedentary behavior policies.

SUBMITTER: Lobczowska K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9137101 | biostudies-literature | 2022 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Social, economic, political, and geographical context that counts: meta-review of implementation determinants for policies promoting healthy diet and physical activity.

Lobczowska Karolina K Banik Anna A Forberger Sarah S Kaczmarek Krzysztof K Kubiak Thomas T Neumann-Podczaska Agnieszka A Romaniuk Piotr P Scheidmeir Marie M Scheller Daniel A DA Steinacker Juergen M JM Wendt Janine J Bekker Marleen P M MPM Zeeb Hajo H Luszczynska Aleksandra A

BMC public health 20220526 1

<h4>Background</h4>This meta-review investigated the context-related implementation determinants from seven domains (geographical, epidemiological, sociocultural, economic, ethics-related, political, and legal) that were systematically indicated as occurring during the implementation of obesity prevention policies targeting a healthy diet and a physically active lifestyle.<h4>Methods</h4>Data from nine databases and documentation of nine major stakeholders were searched for the purpose of this p ...[more]

PMID: 35619065

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAlthough multiple systematic reviews indicate that various determinants (barriers and facilitators) occur in the implementation processes of policies promoting healthy diet, physical activity (PA), and sedentary behavior (SB) reduction, the overarching synthesis of such reviews is missing. Applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), this meta-review aims to (1) identify determinants that were systematically indicated as occurring during the implementation processes and (2) identify differences in the presence of determinants across reviews versus stakeholder documents on healthy diet/PA/SB policies, reviews/stakeholder documents addressing healthy diet policies versus PA/SB policies targeting any population/setting, and healthy diet/PA/SB policies focusing on school settings.MethodsA meta-review of published systematic scoping or realist reviews (k = 25) and stakeholder documents (k = 17) was conducted. Data from nine bibliographic databases and documentation of nine major stakeholders were systematically searched. Included reviews (72%) and stakeholder documents (100%) provided qualitative synthesis of original research on implementation determinants of policies promoting healthy diet or PA or SB reduction, and 28% of reviews provided some quantitative synthesis. Determinants were considered strongly supported if they were indicated by ≥ 60.0% of included reviews/stakeholder documents.ResultsAcross the 26 CFIR-based implementation determinants, seven were supported by 66.7-76.2% of reviews/stakeholder documents. These determinants were cost, networking with other organizations/communities, external policies, structural characteristics of the setting, implementation climate, readiness for implementation, and knowledge/beliefs of involved individuals. Most frequently, published reviews provided support for inner setting and individual determinants, whereas stakeholder documents supported outer and inner setting implementation determinants. Comparisons between policies promoting healthy diet with PA/SB policies revealed shared support for only three implementation determinants: cost, implementation climate, and knowledge/beliefs. In the case of healthy diet/PA/SB policies targeting school settings, 14 out of 26 implementation determinants were strongly supported.ConclusionsThe strongly supported (i.e., systematically indicated) determinants may guide policymakers and researchers who need to prioritize potential implementation determinants when planning and monitoring the implementation of respective policies. Future research should quantitatively assess the importance or role of determinants and test investigate associations between determinants and progress of implementation processes.Trial registrationPROSPERO, # CRD42019133341.

Project description:BackgroundPolicy frameworks focusing on policy implementation may vary in terms of their scope, included constructs, relationships between the constructs, and context factors. Although multiple policy implementation frameworks exist, the overarching synthesis characterizing differences between the frameworks is missing. This study investigated frameworks guiding implementation of policies aiming at healthy nutrition, physical activity promotion, and a reduction of sedentary behavior. In particular, we aimed at examining the scope of the frameworks and the content of included constructs (e.g., referring to implementation processes, determinants, or implementation evaluation), the level at which these constructs operate (e.g., the individual level, the organizational/community level), relationships between the constructs, and the inclusion of equity factors.MethodsA systematic review (the PROSPERO registration no. CRD42019133251) was conducted using 9 databases and 8 stakeholder websites. The content of 38 policy implementation frameworks was coded and analyzed.ResultsAcross the frameworks, 47.4% (18 in 38) addressed three aims: description of the process, determinants, and the evaluation of implementation. The majority of frameworks (65.8%; 25 in 38) accounted for constructs from three levels: individual, organizational/community, and the system level. System-level constructs were included less often (76.3%; 29 in 38) than individual-level or organizational/community-level constructs (86.8% [33 in 38 frameworks] and 94.7% [36 in 38 frameworks] respectively). The majority of frameworks (84.2%, 32 in 38) included at least some sections that were solely of descriptive character (a list of unassociated constructs); 50.0% (19 in 38) included sections of prescriptive character (general steps of implementation); 60.5% (23 in 38) accounted for explanatory sections (assuming bi- or uni-directorial associations). The complex system approach was accounted for only in 21.1% (8 in 38) of frameworks. More than half (55.3%; 21 in 38) of frameworks did not account for any equity constructs (e.g., socioeconomic status, culture).ConclusionsThe majority of policy implementation frameworks have two or three aims (combining processes, determinants and/or the evaluation of implementation), include multi-level constructs (although the system-level determinants are less frequently included than those from the individual- or organizational/community-level), combine sections of purely descriptive character with sections accounting for prescriptive and/or explanatory associations, and are likely to include a little or no equity constructs.RegistrationPROSPERO, #CRD42019133251.

Dataset Information

Social, economic, political, and geographical context that counts: meta-review of implementation determinants for policies promoting healthy diet and physical activity.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Social, economic, political, and geographical context that counts: meta-review of implementation determinants for policies promoting healthy diet and physical activity.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets