A vision for chronic disease prevention intervention research: report from a workshop

Designing a framework for primary health care research in Canada: a scoping literature review

Background

Despite significant investments to improve primary health care (PHC) delivery in Canada, provincial health care systems remain fragmented and uncoordinated. Canada’s commitment to strengthening PHC should be driven by robust research and evaluation that reflects our health policy priorities and responds to the needs of the population. One challenge facing health services researchers is developing and sustaining meaningful research priorities and agendas in an overburdened, complex health care system with limited capacity for PHC research and support for clinician researchers.

Methods

A scoping review of the literature was conducted to examine PHC research priorities in Canada. We compared national research priorities for PHC to research priorities being considered in the province of Alberta. Our scoping review was guided by the following questions: (1) What are the research priorities for PHC in Canada?; and (2) What process is used to identity PHC research priorities?

Results

Six key theme areas for consideration in setting a PHC research agenda were identified: research in practice, research on practice, research about practice, methods of priority setting, infrastructure, and the intersection of PHC and population/public health. These thematic areas provide a new framework for guiding PHC research in Canada. It was developed to generate best practices and new knowledge (i.e., innovation), transform PHC clinical practice or support quality improvement (i.e., spread), and lead to large-scale health care system transformation (i.e., scale).

Conclusions

Priority-driven research aims to answer questions of key importance that are likely to have a significant impact on knowledge or practice in the short to medium term. Setting PHC research priorities ensures funded research has the greatest potential population health benefit, that research funding and outputs are aligned with the needs of practitioners and decision makers, and that there is efficient and equitable use of limited resources with less duplication of research effort. Our findings also suggest that a common research priority framework for PHC research in Canada would ensure that research priority-setting exercises are grounded in an evidence-based process.

Design, methods and demographics from phase I of Alberta's Tomorrow Project cohort: a prospective cohort profile

BACKGROUND

Prospective cohorts have the potential to support multifactorial, health-related research, particularly if they are drawn from the general population, incorporate active and passive follow-up and permission is obtained to allow access by researchers to data repositories. This paper describes Phase I of the Alberta's Tomorrow Project cohort, a broad-based research platform designed to support investigations into factors that influence cancer and chronic disease risk.

METHODS

Adults aged 35-69 years living in Alberta, Canada, with no previous cancer diagnosis other than nonmelanoma skin cancer were recruited to the project by telephone-based random digit dialling. Participants were enrolled if they returned a Health and Lifestyle Questionnaire. Past year diet and physical activity questionnaires were mailed 3 months after enrolment. Consent was sought for active follow-up and linkage with administrative databases. Depending on enrolment date, participants were invited to complete up to 2 follow-up questionnaires (2004 and 2008).

RESULTS

Between 2001 and 2009, 31 072 (39% men) participants (mean age 50.2 [± 9.2] yr) were enrolled and 99% consented to linkage with administrative databases. Participants reported a wide range of educational attainment and household income. Compared with provincial surveillance data from the Canadian Community Health Survey, Alberta's Tomorrow Project participants had higher body mass index, lower prevalence of smoking and similar distribution of chronic health conditions. Follow-up questionnaires were completed by 83% and 72% of participants in 2004 and 2008, respectively. Robust quality control measures resulted in low frequencies of missing data.

INTERPRETATION

Alberta's Tomorrow Project provides a robust platform, based on a prospective cohort design, to support research into risk factors for cancer and chronic disease.

Comparing alternative design options for chronic disease prevention interventions

BACKGROUND

While the randomized clinical trial is considered to provide the highest level of evidence in clinical medicine, its superiority to other study designs in the context of prevention studies is debated. The purpose of this review was (i) to gather evidence about challenges facing both randomized controlled trials and observational designs for the conduct of population-based chronic disease prevention interventions and (ii) to consider the suitability of recently proposed hybrid designs for population-based prevention intervention studies.

METHODS

Rapid review methods were employed for this study. Articles published within 2007-2012, were included if they: (i) discussed challenges or benefits related to any intervention study design, (ii) compared randomized controlled trials (RCT) and observational designs or (iii) introduced a new study design potentially applicable to population-based interventions. After initial screening, papers retained for inclusion were subjected to content analysis and synthesis.

RESULTS

A total of 35 included articles were reviewed and used for synthesis. Both RCTs and observational studies are subject to multiple challenges, the main being external and internal validity for RCTs and observational designs, respectively. Four new hybrid designs identified.

CONCLUSION

Although any high quality design can produce high level of evidence, multiple challenges with prevention intervention RCTs or observational studies identified. New hybrid designs that carry benefits of randomized and observational methods may be the road ahead for to assess the effects of population-based interventions.

Modes of delivery in preventive intervention studies: a rapid review

BACKGROUND

This review was commissioned to generate broad discussion about how to select intervention delivery modes when designing a complex, preventive intervention aimed at chronic disease through the promotion of physical activity, healthy diet and/or medication adherence. In this context, we asked, what are the delivery modes? What are the important design considerations? And how do these compare (e.g. strengths, limitations)?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This review utilized the methods of rapid review, an emerging methodology arising from health technology assessment. The search strategy was applied in Embase and MEDLINE. A qualitative, narrative synthesis was performed on included articles.

RESULTS

After screening, 21 articles remained for synthesis (10 systematic reviews, including 1 review of reviews; four trials or studies; three commentaries or conference proceedings; and 2 were scoping projects). Our synthesis determined that major categories of design considerations when selecting intervention delivery modes include attention to the (i) candidate mode types, (ii) settings and social environment, (iii) intensity and timing, (iv) provider, (v) study population and participants, (vi) cost, (vii) behaviour change technique and (viii) theoretical basis.

CONCLUSION

An array of modes of delivery is available for each of the intervention strategies under consideration (i.e. physical activity, dietary change and medication adherence). No single delivery mode was clearly more appropriate or more effective than another, each having unique strengths and limitations. Delivery mode decisions that take the above-mentioned factors (i-viii) into account will be more fit-for-purpose than those that do not.