Research outcomes informing the selection of public health interventions and strategies to implement them: A cross-sectional survey of Australian policy-maker and practitioner preferences.

BACKGROUND: A key role of public health policy-makers and practitioners is to ensure beneficial interventions are implemented effectively enough to yield improvements in public health. The use of evidence to guide public health decision-making to achieve this is recommended. However, few studies have examined the relative value, as reported by policy-makers and practitioners, of different broad research outcomes (that is, measures of cost, acceptability, and effectiveness). To guide the conduct of research and better inform public health policy and practice, this study aimed at describing the research outcomes that Australian policy-makers and practitioners consider important for their decision-making when selecting: (a) public health interventions; (b) strategies to support their implementation; and (c) to assess the differences in research outcome preferences between policy-makers and practitioners. METHOD: An online value-weighting survey was conducted with Australian public health policy-makers and practitioners working in the field of non-communicable disease prevention. Participants were presented with a list of research outcomes and were asked to select up to five they considered most critical to their decision-making. They then allocated 100 points across these - allocating more points to outcomes perceived as more important. Outcome lists were derived from a review and consolidation of evaluation and outcome frameworks in the fields of public health knowledge translation and implementation. We used descriptive statistics to report relative preferences overall and for policy-makers and practitioners separately. RESULTS: Of the 186 participants; 90 primarily identified as policy-makers and 96 as public health prevention practitioners. Overall, research outcomes of effectiveness, equity, feasibility, and sustainability were identified as the four most important outcomes when considering either interventions or strategies to implement them. Scores were similar for most outcomes between policy-makers and practitioners. CONCLUSION: For Australian policy-makers and practitioners working in the field of non-communicable disease prevention, outcomes related to effectiveness, equity, feasibility, and sustainability appear particularly important to their decisions about the interventions they select and the strategies they employ to implement them. The findings suggest researchers should seek to meet these information needs and prioritize the inclusion of such outcomes in their research and dissemination activities. The extent to which these outcomes are critical to informing the decision of policy-makers and practitioners working in other jurisdictions or contexts warrants further investigation.

Factors associated with experiencing stigma, discrimination, and negative health care treatment among people who inject drugs.

INTRODUCTION: Stigma has negative consequences for the health of people who inject drugs and people living with hepatitis C virus (HCV). This study evaluated factors associated with stigma related to injecting drug use (IDU) or HCV and those associated with being treated negatively by health workers. METHODS: ETHOS Engage is an observational cohort study of people who inject drugs attending drug treatment clinics and needle and syringe programs in Australia. Participants completed a questionnaire including IDU- and HCV-related stigma, and negative treatment by health workers. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with experiencing stigma and negative treatment in a cross-sectional sample. RESULTS: Of 1,211 participants, 31% were women, 64% had injected drugs in the previous month, and 65% had been diagnosed with HCV. IDU-related stigma was reported by 57% of participants and was associated with being a woman, higher than Year 10 education, homelessness, opioid agonist treatment, recent injecting, overdose history, hospitalisation for drug use, and unknown HCV status. HCV-related stigma was reported by 34% of participants diagnosed with HCV and was associated with being a woman, homelessness, receptive needle/syringe sharing, arrest for drug use/possession, and recent HCV testing. Negative treatment from health workers was reported by 45% of participants and was associated with being a woman, receptive needle/syringe sharing, hospitalisation for drug use, and arrest for drug use/possession. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Results highlight important intersections and disparities in stigmatising experiences among people who inject drugs. Considering these intersections can assist health services provide more inclusive care.

Protocol for the process evaluation of an intervention to improve antenatal smoking cessation support (MOHMQuit) in maternity services in New South Wales, Australia.

INTRODUCTION: Smoking cessation in pregnancy remains a public health priority. Our team used the Behaviour Change Wheel to develop the Midwives and Obstetricians Helping Mothers to Quit smoking (MOHMQuit) intervention with health system, leader (including managers and educators) and clinician components. MOHMQuit addresses a critical evidence to practice gap in the provision of smoking cessation support in antenatal care. It involves nine maternity services in New South Wales in a cluster randomised stepped-wedge controlled trial of effectiveness. This paper describes the design and rationale for the process evaluation of MOHMQuit. The process evaluation aims to assess to what extent and how MOHMQuit is being implemented (acceptability; adoption/uptake; appropriateness; feasibility; fidelity; penetration and sustainability), and the context in which it is implemented, in order to support further refinement of MOHMQuit throughout the trial, and aid understanding and interpretation of the results of the trial. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The process evaluation is an integral part of the stepped-wedge trial. Its design is underpinned by implementation science frameworks and adopts a mixed methods approach. Quantitative evidence from participating leaders and clinicians in our study will be used to produce individual and site-level descriptive statistics. Qualitative evidence of leaders' perceptions about the implementation will be collected using semistructured interviews and will be analysed descriptively within-site and thematically across the dataset. The process evaluation will also use publicly available data and observations from the research team implementing MOHMQuit, for example, training logs. These data will be synthesised to provide site-level as well as individual-level implementation outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study received ethical approval from the Population Health Services Research Ethics Committee for NSW, Australia (Reference 2021/ETH00887). Results will be communicated via the study's steering committee and will also be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Trials Registry ACTRN12622000167763. https://www.australianclinicaltrials.gov.au/anzctr/trial/ACTRN12622000167763.

Informing the development of the SUCCEED reporting guideline for studies on the scaling of health interventions: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Quality reporting contributes to effective translation of health research in practice and policy. As an initial step in the development of a reporting guideline for scaling, the Standards for reporting stUdies of sCaling evidenCEd-informED interventions (SUCCEED), we performed a systematic review to identify relevant guidelines and compile a list of potential items. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review according to Cochrane method guidelines. We searched the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, from their respective inceptions. We also searched websites of relevant organizations and Google. We included any document that provided instructions or recommendations, e.g., reporting guideline, checklist, guidance, framework, standard; could inform the design or reporting of scaling interventions; and related to the health sector. We extracted characteristics of the included guidelines and assessed their methodological quality using a 3-item internal validity assessment tool. We extracted all items from the guidelines and classified them according to the main sections of reporting guidelines (title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion and other information). We performed a narrative synthesis based on descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Of 7704 records screened (published between 1999 and 2019), we included 39 guidelines, from which data were extracted from 57 reports. Of the 39 guidelines, 17 were for designing scaling interventions and 22 for reporting implementation interventions. At least one female author was listed in 31 guidelines, and 21 first authors were female. None of the authors belonged to the patient stakeholder group. Only one guideline clearly identified a patient as having participated in the consensus process. More than half the guidelines (56%) had been developed using an evidence-based process. In total, 750 items were extracted from the 39 guidelines and distributed into the 7 main sections. CONCLUSION: Relevant items identified could inform the development of a reporting guideline for scaling studies of evidence-based health interventions. This and our assessment of guidelines could contribute to better reporting in the science and practice of scaling.

Assessing the scalability of evidence-based healthy eating and physical activity interventions in early childhood education and care: A cross-sectional study of end-user perspectives.

OBJECTIVES: To describe early childhood education and care (ECEC) services: i) perceptions regarding the scalability of healthy eating and physical activity interventions; and ii) associations between scalability and service characteristics. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted with a randomly selected sample of ECEC services across Australia. The scalability of 12 healthy eating and physical activity interventions was assessed using items based on the Intervention Scalability Assessment Tool. Higher scores represented higher perceived scalability. RESULTS: From 453 participants, the highest scoring healthy eating and physical activity interventions were 'providing healthy eating education and activities for children' (M43.05) (out of 50) and 'providing sufficient opportunities for child physical activity' (M41.43). The lowest scoring was 'providing families with lunchbox guidelines' (M38.99) and 'engaging families in activities to increase child physical activity' (M38.36). Services located in rural areas, compared to urban areas, scored the overall scalability of both healthy eating and physical activity interventions significantly lower. CONCLUSIONS: Perceptions regarding the scalability of healthy eating and physical activity interventions in the ECEC setting vary according to service characteristics. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: Findings identify where government investment and implementation efforts may be prioritised to facilitate scale-up. An investigation into the barriers and support required for lower-scoring interventions is warranted.

Spontaneous Scaling of a Primary Care Innovation in Real-Life Conditions: Protocol for a Case Study.

BACKGROUND: Scaling effective primary care innovations to benefit more people is of interest to decision makers. However, we know little about how promising innovations are being scaled "spontaneously," that is, without deliberate guidance. OBJECTIVE: We aim to observe, document, and analyze how, in real-life conditions, 1 primary care innovation spontaneously scales up across Quebec, Canada. METHODS: We will conduct a participative study using a descriptive single-case study. It will be guided by the McLean and Gargani principles for scaling and reported according to the COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research) guidelines. Informed by an integrated knowledge translation approach, our steering committee will include patient users throughout the project. Inspired by the Quebec College of Family Physician's "Dragons' Den" primary care program, we will identify a promising primary care innovation that is being or will be scaled spontaneously. We will interview the innovation team about their scaling experiences every month for 1 year. We will conduct interviews and focus groups with decision makers, health care providers, and end users in the innovation team and the target site about their experience of both scaling and receiving the scaled innovation and document meetings as nonparticipant observers. Interview transcripts and documentary data will be analyzed to (1) compare the spontaneous scaling plan and implementation with the McLean and Gargani principles for scaling and (2) determine how it was consistent with or diverged from the 4 McLean and Gargani guiding principles: justification, optimal scale, coordination, and dynamic evaluation. RESULTS: This study was funded in March 2020 by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Recruitment began in November 2023 and data collection began in December 2023. Results are expected to be published in the first quarter of 2024. CONCLUSIONS: Our study will advance the science of scaling by providing practical evidence-based material about scaling health and social care innovations in real-world settings using the 4 guiding principles of McLean and Gargani. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/54855.

Disseminating health research to public health policy-makers and practitioners: a survey of source, message content and delivery modality preferences.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the views of policy-makers and practitioners regarding how best to communicate research evidence is important to support research use in their decision-making. AIM: To quantify and describe public health policy-makers and practitioners' views regarding the source, content and form of messages describing public health research findings to inform their decision-making. We also sought to examine differences in preferences between public health policy-makers and practitioners. METHODS: A cross sectional, value-weighting survey of policy-makers and practitioners was conducted. Participants were asked to allocate a proportion of 100 points across different (i) sources of research evidence, (ii) message content and (iii) the form in which evidence is presented. Points were allocated based on their rating of influence, usefulness and preference when making decisions about health policy or practice. RESULTS: A total of 186 survey responses were received from 90 policy-makers and 96 practitioners. Researchers and government department agencies were the most influential source of research evidence based on mean allocation of points, followed by knowledge brokers, professional peers and associations. Mean point allocation for perceived usefulness of message content was highest for simple summary of key findings and implications, and then evidence-based recommendations and data and statistical summaries. Finally, based on mean scores, policy-makers and practitioners preferred to receive research evidence in the form of peer-reviewed publications, reports, evidence briefs and plain language summaries. There were few differences in scores between policy-makers and practitioners across source, message content or form assessments or those with experience in different behavioural areas. CONCLUSIONS: The findings should provide a basis for the future development and optimization of dissemination strategies to this important stakeholder group.

Physical Activity and Depression and Anxiety Disorders: A Systematic Review of Reviews and Assessment of Causality.

Introduction: Globally, depressive and anxiety disorders are the leading contributors to mental ill health. Physical activity reduces symptoms of depression and anxiety and has been proposed as an adjunct treatment therapy for depression and anxiety. Prospective studies suggest that physical activity may reduce the incidence of depression and anxiety. We conducted a systematic review of reviews with the aim to provide a comprehensive overview of available epidemiologic evidence on the strength of the association between physical activity and incident cases of depression and anxiety and to assess the likelihood of these associations being causal. Methods: We searched Embase and PubMed databases for systematic reviews published between January 1, 2000 and March 19, 2020 that reported findings on the strength of association between physical activity and incidence of depression and anxiety. We updated this search to October 15, 2022. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodologic quality of the included reviews using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews rating scale. We carried out a narrative synthesis of the evidence. We used the Bradford Hill criteria to assess the likelihood of associations being causal. Results: The initial search yielded 770 articles, of which 4 remained for data extraction. Two of the included reviews were scored as high quality, and 2 were scored as low quality. From the 2 included reviews that reported pooled estimates, people with high physical activity levels were found to have a decreased risk of incident depression (adjusted RR=0.83, 95% CI=0.76, 0.90) and reduced odds of developing anxiety (adjusted OR=0.74,95% CI=0.62, 0.88) when compared with those with low physical activity levels. We assessed physical activity to be probably causally related to both depression and anxiety. Discussion: Our evidence is drawn from systematic reviews of observational data. Further high-quality studies, such as randomized control trials, would help to strengthen the evidence base of the associations between physical activity and depression and anxiety. Nonetheless, our findings provide empirical support for the consideration of physical activity in strategies for the prevention of mental ill health.

Physical Activity and Depression and Anxiety Disorders in Australia: A Lifetable Analysis.

Introduction: Mental disorders, in particular, depressive and anxiety disorders, are a leading cause of disability in Australia and globally. Physical activity may reduce the incidence of anxiety and depression, and this supports the inclusion of physical activity in strategies for the prevention of mental ill health. Policy makers need to know the potential impact and cost savings of such strategies. We aimed to quantify the impact of changes in physical activity on the burden of anxiety and depression and healthcare costs in Australia. Methods: We used a proportional multistate lifetable model to estimate the impact of changes in physical activity levels on anxiety and depression burdens for the 2019 Australian population (numbering 24.6 million) over their remaining lifetime. The changes in physical activity were modeled through 3 counterfactual scenarios informed by policy targets: attainment of the Australian Physical Activity Guidelines and achievement of the WHO Global Action Plan on Physical Activity targets of a 10% relative reduction in the prevalence of insufficient physical activity by 2025 and a 15% relative reduction by 2030. Results: If all Australians adhered to the recommended minimum physical activity levels, in 25 years' time, the burden of anxiety could be reduced by up to 6.4% (95% uncertainty intervals=2.5, 10.6), and that of depression could be reduced by 4.4% (95% uncertainty intervals=2.3, 6.5). Over the lifetime of the 2019 Australian population, the gains could add up to 640,592 health-adjusted life years for anxiety (26 health-adjusted life years per 1,000 persons), 523,717 health-adjusted life years for depression (21 health-adjusted life years per 1,000 persons), and healthcare cost savings of 5.4 billion Australian dollars for anxiety (220 Australian dollars per capita) and 5.8 billion for depression (237 Australian dollars per capita). Conclusions: Adherence to the Australian physical activity guidelines and achievement of the 2025 and 2030 global physical activity targets could lead to a substantial reduction of the burden of anxiety and depression. This study provides empirical support for the inclusion of physical activity in strategies for the prevention of mental ill health. Future studies should also assess the size and distribution of the benefits for different socioeconomic and ethnic groups.

Study protocol of an economic evaluation embedded in the Midwives and Obstetricians Helping Mothers to Quit Smoking (MOHMQuit) trial.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco smoking during pregnancy is the most important preventable risk factor for pregnancy complications and adverse birth outcomes and can have lifelong consequences for infants. Smoking during pregnancy is associated with higher healthcare costs related to birth complications and during childhood. Psychosocial interventions to support pregnant women to quit are effective, yet provision of smoking cessation support has been inconsistent. The Midwives and Obstetricians Helping Mothers to Quit Smoking (MOHMQuit) intervention provides systems change, and leadership and clinician elements, to support clinicians to help women stop smoking in pregnancy. There have been few long-term analyses conducted of the cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions for pregnant women that target healthcare providers. This protocol describes the economic evaluation of the MOHMQuit trial, a pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled implementation trial in nine public maternity services in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, to ascertain whether MOHMQuit is cost-effective in supporting clinicians to help women quit smoking in pregnancy compared to usual care. METHODS: Two primary analyses will be carried out comparing MOHMQuit with usual care from an Australian health care system perspective: i) a within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis with results presented as the incremental cost per additional quitter; and ii) a lifetime cost-utility analysis using a published probabilistic decision analytic Markov model with results presented as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for mother and child. Patient-level data on resource use and outcomes will be used in the within-trial analysis and extrapolated and supplemented with national population statistics and published data from the literature for the lifetime analysis. DISCUSSION: There is increasing demand for information on the cost-effectiveness of implementing healthcare interventions to provide policy makers with critical information for the best value for money within finite budgets. Economic evaluation of the MOHMQuit trial will provide essential, policy-relevant information for decision makers on the value of evidence-based implementation of support for healthcare providers delivering services for pregnant women. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: ACTRN12622000167763, registered 2 February 2022.

From trials to communities: implementation and scale-up of health behaviour interventions.

BACKGROUND: To maximise their potential benefits to communities, effective health behaviour interventions need to be implemented, ideally 'at scale', and are often adapted as part of this. To inform future implementation and scale-up efforts, this study broadly sought to understand (i) how often health behaviour interventions are implemented in communities, (ii) the adaptations that occur; (iii) how frequency it occurred 'at scale'; and (iv) factors associated with 'scale-up'. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted of corresponding authors of trials (randomised or non-randomised) assessing the effects of preventive health behaviour interventions. Included studies of relevant Cochrane reviews served as a sampling frame. Participants were asked to report on the implementation and scale-up (defined as investment in large scale delivery by a (non)government organisation) of their intervention in the community following trial completion, adaptations made, and any research dissemination strategies employed. Information was extracted from published reports of the trial including assessments of effectiveness and risk of bias. RESULTS: Authors of 104 trials completed the survey. Almost half of the interventions were implemented following trial completion (taking on average 19 months), and 54% of those were adapted prior to doing so. The most common adaptations were adding intervention components, and adapting the intervention to fit within the local service setting. Scale-up occurred in 33% of all interventions. There were no significant associations between research trial characteristics such as intervention effectiveness, risk of bias, setting, involvement of end-user, and incidence of scale-up. However the number of research dissemination strategies was positively associated to the odds of an intervention being scaled-up (OR = 1.50; 95% CI: 1.19, 1.88; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Adaptation of implemented trials is often undertaken. Most health behaviour interventions are not implemented or scaled-up following trial completion. The use of a greater number of dissemination strategies may increase the likelihood of scaled up.

Development and Application of the Scale-Up Reflection Guide (SRG).

Scaling up effective interventions in public health is complex and comprehensive, and published accounts of the scale-up process are scarce. Key aspects of the scale-up experience need to be more comprehensively captured. This study describes the development of a guide for reflecting on and documenting the scale-up of public health interventions, to increase the depth of practice-based information of scaling up. Reviews of relevant scale-up frameworks along with expert input informed the development of the guide. We evaluated its acceptability with potential end-users and applied it to two real-world case studies. The Scale-up Reflection Guide (SRG) provides a structure and process for reflecting on and documenting key aspects of the scale-up process of public health interventions. The SRG is comprised of eight sections: context of completion; intervention delivery, history/background; intervention components; costs/funding strategies and partnership arrangements; the scale-up setting and delivery; scale-up process; and evidence of effectiveness and long-term outcomes. Utilization of the SRG may improve the consistency and reporting for the scale-up of public health interventions and facilitate knowledge sharing. The SRG can be used by a variety of stakeholders including researchers, policymakers or practitioners to more comprehensively reflect on and document scale-up experiences and inform future practice.

The Potential Impact of Physical Activity on the Burden of Osteoarthritis and Low Back Pain in Australia: A Systematic Review of Reviews and Life Table Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives were (1) to establish the strength of the association between incident cases of osteoarthritis (OA) and low back pain (LBP), and physical activity (PA) and to assess the likelihood of the associations being causal; and (2) to quantify the impact of PA on the burden of OA and LBP in Australia. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review in EMBASE and PubMed databases from January 01, 2000, to April 28, 2020. We used the Bradford Hill viewpoints to assess causality. We used a proportional multistate life table model to estimate the impact of changes in the PA levels on OA and LBP burdens for the 2019 Australian population (aged ≥ 20 y) over their remaining lifetime. RESULTS: We found that both OA and LBP are possibly causally related to physical inactivity. Assuming causality, our model projected that if the 2025 World Health Organization global target for PA was met, the burden in 25 years' time could be reduced by 70,000 prevalent cases of OA and over 11,000 cases of LBP. Over the lifetime of the current adult population of Australia, the gains could add up to approximately 672,814 health-adjusted life years (HALYs) for OA (ie, 27 HALYs per 1000 persons) and 114,042 HALYs for LBP (ie, 5 HALYs per 1000 persons). The HALY gains would be 1.4 times bigger if the 2030 World Health Organization global target for PA was achieved and 11 times bigger if all Australians adhered to the Australian PA guidelines. CONCLUSION: This study provides empirical support for the adoption of PA in strategies for the prevention of OA and back pain.

Evidence on Scaling in Health and Social Care: An Umbrella Review.

Policy Points More rigorous methodologies and systematic approaches should be encouraged in the science of scaling. This will help researchers better determine the effectiveness of scaling, guide stakeholders in the scaling process, and ultimately increase the impacts of health innovations. The practice and the science of scaling need to expand worldwide to address complex health conditions such as noncommunicable and chronic diseases. Although most of the scaling experiences described in the literature are occurring in the Global South, most of the authors publishing on it are based in the Global North. As the science of scaling spreads across the world with the aim of reducing health inequities, it is also essential to address the power imbalance in how we do scaling research globally. CONTEXT: Scaling of effective innovations in health and social care is essential to increase their impact. We aimed to synthesize the evidence base on scaling and identify current knowledge gaps. METHODS: We conducted an umbrella review according to the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers' Manual. We included any type of review that 1) focused on scaling, 2) covered health or social care, and 3) presented a methods section. We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, Sociological Abstracts (ProQuest), Academic Search Premier (EBSCO), and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global from their inception to August 6, 2020. We searched the gray literature using, e.g., Google and WHO-ExpandNet. We assessed methodological quality with AMSTAR2. Paired reviewers independently selected and extracted eligible reviews and assessed study quality. A narrative synthesis was performed. FINDINGS: Of 24,269 records, 137 unique reviews were included. The quality of the 58 systematic reviews was critically low (n = 42). The most frequent review type was systematic review (n = 58). Most reported on scaling in low- and middle-income countries (n = 59), whereas most first authors were from high-income countries (n = 114). Most reviews concerned infectious diseases (n = 36) or maternal-child health (n = 28). They mainly focused on interventions (n = 37), barriers and facilitators (n = 29), frameworks (n = 24), scalability (n = 24), and costs (n = 14). The WHO/ExpandNet scaling definition was the definition most frequently used (n = 26). Domains most reported as influencing scaling success were building scaling infrastructure (e.g., creating new service sites) and human resources (e.g., training community health care providers). CONCLUSIONS: The evidence base on scaling is evolving rapidly as reflected by publication trends, the range of focus areas, and diversity of scaling definitions. Our study highlights knowledge gaps around methodology and research infrastructures to facilitate equitable North-South research relationships. Common efforts are needed to ensure scaling expands the impacts of health and social innovations to broader populations.

A mixed methods evaluation of Quit for new life, a smoking cessation initiative for women having an Aboriginal baby.

BACKGROUND: Quit for new life (QFNL) is a smoking cessation initiative developed to support mothers of Aboriginal babies to quit smoking during pregnancy. The state-wide initiative provides support for pregnant women and their households including free nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and follow up cessation advice. Services are also supported to implement systems-level changes and integrate QFNL into routine care. This study aimed to evaluate: (1) models of implementation of QFNL; (2) the uptake of QFNL; (3) the impact of QFNL on smoking behaviours; and (4) stakeholder perceptions of the initiative. METHODS: A mixed methods study was conducted comprising semi-structured interviews and analysis of routinely collected data. Interviews were conducted with 6 clients and 35 stakeholders involved in program implementation. Data were analysed using inductive content analysis. Aboriginal Maternal and Infant Health Service Data Collection (AMDC) records for the period July 2012-June 2015 were investigated to examine how many eligible women attended a service implementing QFNL and how many women took up a QFNL support. Smoking cessation rates were compared in women attending a service offering QFNL with women attending the same service prior to the implementation of QFNL to determine program impact. RESULTS: QFNL was implemented in 70 services located in 13 LHDs across New South Wales. Over 430 staff attended QFNL training, including 101 staff in Aboriginal-identified roles. In the period July 2012-June 2015 27% (n = 1549) of eligible women attended a service implementing QFNL and 21% (n = 320) of these were recorded as taking up a QFNL support. While stakeholders shared stories of success, no statistically significant impact of QFNL on smoking cessation rates was identified (N = 3502; Odds ratio (OR) = 1.28; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 0.96-1.70; p-value = 0.0905). QFNL was acceptable to both clients and stakeholders, increased awareness about smoking cessation, and gave staff resources to support clients. CONCLUSION: QFNL was perceived as acceptable by stakeholders and clients and provided care providers with knowledge and tangible support to offer women who presented at antenatal care as smokers, however, no statistically significant impact on rates of smoking cessation were found using the measures available.

Team characteristics associated with weight loss in a First Nations community intervention: An observational study.

ISSUE ADDRESSED: Group-based weight-loss programs can be effective in addressing high rates of overweight and obesity among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples. The purpose was to determine associations between demographic and baseline weight-related variables and team weight loss in a community-based intervention as no previous studies have analysed this at a team level. METHODS: Binomial models tested associations between team-level age, proportion female and baseline weight and classification as higher weight-loss team (HWT) (>50% persons losing 2.5% of initial weight) vs lower weight-loss team (LWT). Linear regressions compared HWT and LWT on diet and physical activity (PA) outcomes adjusted for age and gender. RESULTS: For each 1 kg increment in mean baseline weight, a team's likelihood of higher weight loss was increased by 4% (APR: 1.04, 95%CI: 1.00, 1.08). HWTs increased vigorous PA by 0.32 sessions more than LWTs (P = .02). Fruit and vegetable intakes were not associated with team weight loss classification. CONCLUSIONS: Only baseline weight and vigorous PA distinguished HWT and LWT. Promoting PA components in team-based weight-loss approaches may be beneficial as these lend themselves to group participation. SO WHAT?: Demographic and baseline weight-related variables are largely not predictive of weight loss success in group programs. Identifying other characteristics shared by HWT may help teams achieve weight loss.

The MOHMQuit (Midwives and Obstetricians Helping Mothers to Quit Smoking) Trial: protocol for a stepped-wedge implementation trial to improve best practice smoking cessation support in public antenatal care services.

BACKGROUND: Smoking during pregnancy is the most important preventable cause of adverse pregnancy outcomes, yet smoking cessation support (SCS) is inconsistently provided. The MOMHQUIT intervention was developed to address this evidence-practice gap, using the Behaviour Change Wheel method by mapping barriers to intervention strategies. MOHMQuit includes systems, leadership and clinician elements. This implementation trial will determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of MOHMQuit in improving smoking cessation rates in pregnant women in public maternity care services in Australia; test the mechanisms of action of the intervention strategies; and examine implementation outcomes. METHODS: A stepped-wedge cluster-randomised design will be used. Implementation of MOHMQuit will include reinforcing leadership investment in SCS as a clinical priority, strengthening maternity care clinicians' knowledge, skills, confidence and attitudes towards the provision of SCS, and clinicians' documentation of guideline-recommended SCS provided during antenatal care. Approximately, 4000 women who report smoking during pregnancy will be recruited across nine sites. The intervention and its implementation will be evaluated using a mixed methods approach. The primary outcome will be 7-day point prevalence abstinence at the end of pregnancy, among pregnant smokers, verified by salivary cotinine testing. Continuous data collection from electronic medical records and telephone interviews with postpartum women will occur throughout 32 months of the trial to assess changes in cessation rates reported by women, and SCS documented by clinicians and reported by women. Data collection to assess changes in clinicians' knowledge, skills, confidence and attitudes will occur prior to and immediately after the intervention at each site, and again 6 months later. Questionnaires at 3 months following the intervention, and semi-structured interviews at 6 months with maternity service leaders will explore leaders' perceptions of acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, adaptations and fidelity of delivery of the MOHMQuit intervention. Structural equation modelling will examine causal linkages between the strategies, mediators and outcomes. Cost-effectiveness analyses will also be undertaken. DISCUSSION: This study will provide evidence of the effectiveness of a multi-level implementation intervention to support policy decisions; and evidence regarding mechanisms of action of the intervention strategies (how the strategies effected outcomes) to support further theoretical developments in implementation science. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12622000167763, registered February 2nd 2022.

Tensions and Paradoxes of Scaling Up: A Critical Reflection on Physical Activity Promotion.

BACKGROUND: Achieving system-level, sustainable 'scale-up' of interventions is the epitome of successful translation of evidence-based approaches in population health. In physical activity promotion, few evidence-based interventions reach implementation at scale or become embedded within systems for sustainable health impact. This is despite the vast published literature describing efficacy studies of small-scale physical activity interventions. Research into physical activity scale-up (through case-study analysis; evaluations of scale-up processes in implementation trials; and mapping the processes, strategies, and principles for scale-up) has identified barriers and facilitators to intervention expansion. Many interventions are implemented at scale by governments but have not been evaluated or have unpublished evaluation information. Further, few public health interventions have evaluations that reveal the costs and benefits of scaled-up implementation. This lack of economic information introduces an additional element of risk for decision makers when deciding which physical activity interventions should be supported with scarce funding resources. Decision-makers face many other challenges when scaling interventions which do not relate to formal research trials of scale-up; Methods: To explore these issues, a multidisciplinary two-day workshop involving experts in physical activity scale-up was convened by the University of Newcastle, Australia, and the University of Ottawa, Canada (February 2019); Results: In this paper we discuss some of the scale-up tensions (challenges and conflicts) and paradoxes (things that are contrary to expectations) that emerged from this workshop in the context of the current literature and our own experiences in this field. We frame scale-up tensions according to epistemology, methodology, time, and partnerships; and paradoxes as 'reach without scale', 'planned serendipity' and 'simple complexity'. We reflect on the implications of these scale-up tensions and paradoxes, providing considerations for future scale-up research and practice moving forward; Conclusions: In this paper, we delve deeper into stakeholders' assumptions, processes and expectations of scaling up, and challenge in what ways as stakeholders, we all contribute to desired or undesired outcomes. Through a lens of 'tensions' and 'paradoxes', we make an original contribution to the scale-up literature that might influence current perspectives of scaling-up, provide future approaches for physical activity promotion, and contribute to understanding of dynamic of research-practice partnerships.

45 and Up COVID Insights: a dynamic and collaborative approach to evidence-making during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: In response to the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, a research project was developed with a cohort of 45 and Up Study participants to generate timely, relevant evidence to guide policy, practice and planning. This paper describes the research model, the cohort establishment and characteristics, and some findings. METHODS: A subgroup of 45 and Up Study participants was invited to enrol in 45 and Up COVID Insights -a series of five online surveys conducted during 2020-22. The model involved a close collaborative partnership with the New South Wales Ministry of Health and a panel of scientific advisers, an agile data collection methodology and rapid dissemination of findings. Frequent, iterative engagement with stakeholders provided a framework for identifying survey themes and questions and ensured wide dissemination of findings. Themes included healthcare use, attitudes toward and uptake of COVID-19 prevention measures, and the impact of the pandemic on mental health, loneliness, and lifestyle behaviours. RESULTS: 45 and Up COVID Insights achieved strong stakeholder engagement through extensive consultation and rapid reporting of results. The project recruited a diverse cohort of 32 115 participants: median age 68 years (range: 56-100+); 8% from outer regional/remote areas; 12% from the most socioeconomically disadvantaged communities; and 9% from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. The first four surveys found that the impact of the pandemic varied across populations and stages of the pandemic. Between February-April (survey 2) 2021, 10% reported missed healthcare in the past month because of the pandemic, rising to 26% by September-November 2021 (survey 4). Quality of life remained high (>90% good-excellent across the surveys). As the pandemic progressed, the proportion reporting worsened mental health as a result increased from 29% (July-December 2020, survey 1) to 46% (survey 4). In survey 2 (February-April 2021), 89% intended to get the COVID-19 vaccine, with 8% unsure. By late 2021, vaccination uptake was high, with 98% of respondents having received at least one vaccination. CONCLUSION: There is great value in harnessing a large longitudinal, well-described, and diverse cohort study to generate evidence in a changing context with evolving information needs. The collaborative model enhanced the value and relevance of the data to inform decisions.