Table 2 SFL Effectiveness-Implementation Hybrid design
Evaluation | Research Question | Research Methods & Data collection approaches | Tools & Frameworks | Targeted Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Implementation | What are the facilitators and barriers that impact implementation and sustainability of SFL across the individual, provider, organisation and wider systems level? | Qualitative Participatory Research Focus groups, Interviews (Hybrid approach of thematic deductive and inductive analysis) Ethnography Stakeholder meetings | PRACTIS guide (PRACTical planning for Implementation and Scale-up) CFIR (Consolidated Framework for implementation research) Semi-structured topic guides | Acceptability Adoption Appropriateness Feasibility Fidelity Implementation Cost Penetration Sustainability |
What is the process by which the SFL model is developed and implemented in order to effect maximum penetration, adoption and acceptability among key stakeholders? | Qualitative Participatory Research Focus groups, Interviews Ethnography Stakeholder meetings Quantitative Recording attendance (providers) & Self-reported attendance at follow-up (participants) | PRACTIS guide (PRACTical planning for Implementation and Scale-up) CFIR (Consolidated Framework for implementation research) Attendance and membership records Semi-structured topic guides | Penetration Adoption Acceptability | |
How does the Partnership and Capacity building focus of SFL contribute to the implementation and scale-up of the programme? | Qualitative Participatory Research Interviews Stakeholder meetings Capacity Building Workshops | PRACTIS guide (PRACTical planning for Implementation and Scale-up) CFIR (Consolidated Framework for implementation research) Semi-structured topic guides | Acceptability Adoption Appropriateness Feasibility Sustainability | |
Is the SFL implementation approach cost-effective? | Quantitative Cost Gathering Assessment of cost using Quality Adjusted Life Years | The SF6D | Implementation Cost Feasibility Sustainability | |
Effectiveness- Implementation | Does participation in Sheds for Life improve health knowledge attitudes, outcomes and behaviours among participants? | Pragmatic controlled Trial Quantitative Questionnaires administered at baseline, 3, 6 & 12 months Qualitative Focus groups, ethnography, key informant interviews | Core outcome tools Self-reported Health Rating Seeking health information rating 7-item Short Warwick- Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (SWEMWBS) 5- point Likert Scales assessing; comfort having a conversation about mental health, understanding mental health and identifying practical supports 3-Item UCLA Loneliness Scale. Rated on a 3- point scale. Higher scores equal increased loneliness ONS 11-point Scales 0–10 Life satisfaction and life worth 8 point scales 0–7 physical activity and walking measure The 9-item self-efficacy for exercise scale (SEE) Close support, belonging, trust Alcohol, smoking & fruit & vegetable consumption Cooking frequency, cooking style and 12 measure scale measuring confidence constructs in relation to cooking Supplementary outcomes: Questions measuring changes in confidence and knowledge in relation to supplementary components developed in collaboration with provider organisations Qualitative tools Semi-structured topic guides | Quantitative Core outcomes Subjective Wellbeing Help-seeking Physical Activity Mental Wellbeing Diet & Cooking skills Social Capital Self-efficacy Quantitative Supplementary outcomes Diabetes Awareness, SafeTALK suicide prevention, Digital Literacy, Oral Health, Cancer awareness, CPR Qualitative outcomes Changes in attitudes and behaviours Acceptability Adoption Appropriateness |