↓ Skip to main content

Improving Fidelity of Translation of the Stepping On Falls Prevention Program through Root Cause Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Improving Fidelity of Translation of the Stepping On Falls Prevention Program through Root Cause Analysis
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2016.00251
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jane E. Mahoney, Vicki L. Gobel, Terry Shea, Jodi Janczewski, Sandy Cech, Lindy Clemson

Abstract

Fidelity monitoring is essential with implementation of complex health interventions, but there is little description of how to use results of fidelity monitoring to improve the draft program package prior to widespread dissemination. Root cause analysis (RCA) provides a systematic approach to identifying underlying causes and devising solutions to prevent errors in complex processes. Its use has not been described in implementation science. Stepping On (SO) is a small group, community-based intervention that has been shown to reduce falls by 31%. To prepare SO for widespread U.S. dissemination, we conducted a pilot of the draft program package, monitoring the seven SO sessions for fidelity of program delivery and assessing participant receipt and enactment through participant interviews after the workshop. Lapses to fidelity in program delivery, receipt, and enactment were identified. We performed a RCA to identify underlying causes of, and solutions to, such lapses, with the goal of preventing fidelity lapses with widespread dissemination. Lapses to fidelity in program delivery were in the domains of group leader's role, use of adult learning principles, and introducing and upgrading the exercises. Lapses in fidelity of participant receipt and enactment included lack of knowledge about balance exercises and reduced adherence to frequency of exercise practice and advancement of exercise. Root causes related to leader training and background, site characteristics and capacity, and participant frailty and expectations prior to starting the program. The RCA resulted in changes to the program manual, the training program, and training manual for new leaders, and to the methods for and criteria for participant and leader recruitment. A Site Implementation Guide was created to provide information to sites interested in the program. Disseminating complex interventions can be done more smoothly by first using a systematic quality improvement technique, such as the RCA, to identify how lapses in fidelity occur during the earliest stages of implementation. This technique can also help bring about solutions to these lapses of fidelity prior to widespread dissemination across multiple domain lapses.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 14 26%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Master 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Other 9 17%
Unknown 13 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 14 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 22 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 November 2016.
All research outputs
#14,742,944
of 22,901,818 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#3,963
of 10,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,063
of 307,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#46
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,901,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,055 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 307,484 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.