Table 1 Indicators used to evaluate feasibility, acceptability, fidelity and contextual influences
Process evaluation tasks | How this was enacted |
|---|---|
Feasibility. Exposure to the intervention/elements of the intervention | Number of participants given login credentials, website information package and introductory session Problems with watch syncing software Interviews with participants/parents |
Acceptability. Participation (describing intervention participation rates); these include measures of ‘recruitment’ to the program and ‘reach into a population’, program satisfaction | Number approached/recruited Reasons for refusal Methods of recruitment Engagement with website/website components Engagement with watch syncing software Participant/parent burden and satisfaction questionnaires Interviews with participants/parents |
Fidelity. Delivery of the intervention, or assessing scaling-up of the intervention to larger populations | Number of prompts/activity reports sent Location and completeness of data collection Difference in delivery across sites Adaptations made to deliver the program |
Contextual influences. Context of the intervention | Log of problems in the delivery of SKIP, problems experienced, barriers to implementation Record of ways in which SKIP was delivered differently across sites and reasons. Interviews with healthcare practitioners |