Implementation of Healthy Eating Interventions in Center-Based Childcare: The Selection, Application, and Reporting of Theories, Models, and Frameworks

Evaluating the translation of implementation science to clinical artificial intelligence: a bibliometric study of qualitative research

Introduction

Whilst a theoretical basis for implementation research is seen as advantageous, there is little clarity over if and how the application of theories, models or frameworks (TMF) impact implementation outcomes. Clinical artificial intelligence (AI) continues to receive multi-stakeholder interest and investment, yet a significant implementation gap remains. This bibliometric study aims to measure and characterize TMF application in qualitative clinical AI research to identify opportunities to improve research practice and its impact on clinical AI implementation.

Methods

Qualitative research of stakeholder perspectives on clinical AI published between January 2014 and October 2022 was systematically identified. Eligible studies were characterized by their publication type, clinical and geographical context, type of clinical AI studied, data collection method, participants and application of any TMF. Each TMF applied by eligible studies, its justification and mode of application was characterized.

Results

Of 202 eligible studies, 70 (34.7%) applied a TMF. There was an 8-fold increase in the number of publications between 2014 and 2022 but no significant increase in the proportion applying TMFs. Of the 50 TMFs applied, 40 (80%) were only applied once, with the Technology Acceptance Model applied most frequently (n = 9). Seven TMFs were novel contributions embedded within an eligible study. A minority of studies justified TMF application (n = 51,58.6%) and it was uncommon to discuss an alternative TMF or the limitations of the one selected (n = 11,12.6%). The most common way in which a TMF was applied in eligible studies was data analysis (n = 44,50.6%). Implementation guidelines or tools were explicitly referenced by 2 reports (1.0%).

Conclusion

TMFs have not been commonly applied in qualitative research of clinical AI. When TMFs have been applied there has been (i) little consensus on TMF selection (ii) limited description of selection rationale and (iii) lack of clarity over how TMFs inform research. We consider this to represent an opportunity to improve implementation science's translation to clinical AI research and clinical AI into practice by promoting the rigor and frequency of TMF application. We recommend that the finite resources of the implementation science community are diverted toward increasing accessibility and engagement with theory informed practices. The considered application of theories, models and frameworks (TMF) are thought to contribute to the impact of implementation science on the translation of innovations into real-world care. The frequency and nature of TMF use are yet to be described within digital health innovations, including the prominent field of clinical AI. A well-known implementation gap, coined as the "AI chasm" continues to limit the impact of clinical AI on real-world care. From this bibliometric study of the frequency and quality of TMF use within qualitative clinical AI research, we found that TMFs are usually not applied, their selection is highly varied between studies and there is not often a convincing rationale for their selection. Promoting the rigor and frequency of TMF use appears to present an opportunity to improve the translation of clinical AI into practice.

Adoption, implementation, and sustainability of early childhood feeding, nutrition and active play interventions in real-world settings: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Instilling healthy dietary habits and active play in early childhood is an important public health focus. Interventions supporting the establishment of nutrition and active play behaviours in the first years of life have shown positive outcomes and long-term cost-effectiveness, however, most are research trials, with limited evidence regarding real-world application. Implementation science theories, models and frameworks (TMFs) can guide the process of research translation from trial to real-world intervention. The application of TMFs within nutrition and active play intervention studies in early childhood (< 5 years) is currently unknown. This systematic review identified the use of TMFs and barriers/ enablers associated with intervention adoption, implementation, and sustainability in early childhood nutrition and active play interventions implemented under real-world conditions.

METHODS

Six databases were searched for peer-reviewed publications between 2000-2021. Studies were included if primary outcomes reported improvement in diet, physical activity or sedentary behaviours amongst children aged < 5 years and interventions were delivered under real-world conditions within a community and/or healthcare setting. Two reviewers extracted and evaluated studies, cross checked by a third and verified by all authors. Quality assessment of included studies was completed by two authors using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT).

RESULTS

Eleven studies comprising eleven unique interventions were included. Studies represented low, middle and high-income countries, and were conducted across a range of settings. Five TMFs were identified representing four of Nilsen's implementation model categories, predominantly 'evaluation models'. Ninety-nine barriers/facilitators were extracted across the three intervention phases-Implementation (n = 33 barriers; 33 facilitators), Sustainability (n = 19 barriers; n = 9 facilitators), Adoption (n = 2 barriers; n = 3 facilitators). Identified barriers/facilitators were mapped to the five domains of the Durlak and DuPre framework, with 'funding', 'compatibility' and 'integration of new programming' common across the three intervention phases.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings demonstrate that there is no systematic application of TMFs in the planning, implementation and/or evaluation of early childhood nutrition and active play interventions in real-world settings, and selective and sporadic application of TMFs occurs across the intervention lifespan. This apparent limited uptake of TMFs is a missed opportunity to enhance real-world implementation success.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42021243841).

An Environmental Scan of Existing Canadian Childcare Resources Targeting Improvements in Health Behaviours

The objective was to conduct an environmental scan of existing Canadian childcare resources targeting nutrition, physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and/or sleep. A comprehensive search plan was conducted that involved four search strategies: (1) grey literature databases, (2) customized Google search engines, (3) targeted websites, and (4) consultation with content experts. A resource (i.e., information, materials) must have been created by government or an organization/agency within Canada, available in English, intended for childcare educators or directors working with children ≤ 5 years of age, and focused on targeting improvements in nutrition, physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and/or sleep. The quality of each included resource was assessed using a modified version of the Authority, Accuracy, Coverage, Objectivity, Date, Significance checklist. A total of 192 eligible resources were included. Most resources targeted only nutrition (n = 101) or physical activity (n = 60), and few resources targeted only sedentary behaviour (n = 2) or sleep (n = 1). The remaining 28 resources targeted more than one health behaviour. The 4 most common topics of resources were menu/meal planning (n = 55), healthy nutrition practices/environment (n = 37), physical activities/games (n = 33), and nutrition/food literacy (n = 20). Only 52 included resources cited evidence. One-third of the included resources (n = 64) were rated as high quality, including 55 that received a point for the significance criterion. Therefore, numerous high quality Canadian childcare resources exist for nutrition and physical activity. Future resource development is needed for sedentary behaviour and sleep. Findings can assist future intervention work and the database of resources can be utilized by relevant stakeholders to support other childcare initiatives.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10643-021-01266-2.

Gaps in Nutrition Policy Implementation in Childcare Centres in The Edmonton Metropolitan Region: A Cross-Sectional Survey

Purpose: To describe (i) nutrition policies in childcare centres, (ii) the resources and processes used to enable policy implementation, and (iii) the association between policy implementation and childcare centres' or administrators' characteristics.Methods: Between October 2018 and June 2019 a web-based survey that addressed nutrition policy, policy implementation, and sociodemographic characteristics was sent to eligible childcare programs (centre-based and provided meals) in the Edmonton (Alberta) metropolitan region. The survey was pretested and pilot tested. Statistical tests examined the relationship between policy implementation with centres' and administrators' characteristics.Results: Of 312 childcare centres that received the survey invitation, 43 completed it. The majority of centres had a nutrition policy in place (94%). On average, centres had about 9 of the 17 implementation resources and processes assessed. Most often administrators reported actively encouraging the implementation of the nutrition policy (n = 35; 87%) and least often writing evaluation reports of the implementation of the nutrition policy (n = 9; 22%). Administrator's education level was associated with implementation total score (p = 0.009; Kruskal-Wallis).Conclusion: Most childcare centres had a nutrition policy in place, but many lacked resources and processes to enable policy implementation. Additional support is required to improve nutrition policy development and implementation.