Gobat Nina, Littlecott Hannah, Williams Andy, McEwan Kirsten, Stanton Helen, Robling Michael, Rollnick Stephen, Murphy Simon, Evans Rhiannon
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
School of Social Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
BMC Public Health. 2021 Jan 18;21(1):154. doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-10124-6.
The evidence-base for whole school approaches aimed at improving student mental health and wellbeing remains limited. This may be due to a focus on developing and evaluating de-novo, research-led interventions, while neglecting the potential of local, contextually-relevant innovation that has demonstrated acceptability and feasibility. This study reports a novel approach to modelling and refining the programme theory of a whole-school restorative approach, alongside plans to scale up through a national educational infrastructure in order to support robust scientific evaluation.
A pragmatic formative process evaluation was conducted of a routinized whole-school restorative approach aimed at improving student mental health and wellbeing in Wales.
The study reports the six phases of the pragmatic formative process evaluation. These are: 1) identification of innovative local practice; 2) scoping review of evidence-base to identify potential programme theory; outcomes; and contextual characteristics that influence implementation; 3) establishment of a Transdisciplinary Action Research (TDAR) group; 4) co-production and confirmation of an initial programme theory with stakeholders; 5) planning to optimise intervention delivery in local contexts; and 6) planning for feasibility and outcome evaluation. The phases of this model may be iterative and not necessarily sequential.
Formative, pragmatic process evaluations can support researchers, policy-makers and practitioners in developing robust scientific evidence-bases for acceptable and feasible local innovations that do not already have a clear evidence base. The case of a whole-school restorative approach provides a case example of how such an evaluation may be undertaken.
旨在改善学生心理健康和幸福感的全校性方法的证据基础仍然有限。这可能是由于专注于开发和评估全新的、以研究为主导的干预措施,而忽视了已证明具有可接受性和可行性的本地相关创新的潜力。本研究报告了一种新颖的方法,用于构建和完善全校性恢复性方法的项目理论,并计划通过国家教育基础设施进行推广,以支持有力的科学评估。
对威尔士一种旨在改善学生心理健康和幸福感的常规全校性恢复性方法进行了务实的形成性过程评估。
该研究报告了务实的形成性过程评估的六个阶段。这些阶段分别是:1)识别创新性的本地实践;2)对证据基础进行范围审查,以确定潜在的项目理论、结果以及影响实施的背景特征;3)成立跨学科行动研究(TDAR)小组;4)与利益相关者共同制定并确认初始项目理论;5)规划在本地环境中优化干预措施的实施;6)规划可行性和结果评估。该模型的各个阶段可能是迭代的,不一定按顺序进行。
形成性、务实的过程评估可以支持研究人员、政策制定者和从业者为尚无明确证据基础但具有可接受性和可行性的本地创新建立有力的科学证据基础。全校性恢复性方法的案例提供了一个如何进行此类评估的实例。