Table 2 Study characteristics
Author, year, country | Study Design | Study Population | Age of children in study | Intervention Setting | Implementation Model, Theory, Framework | Implementation Model Category |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sako, 2017 [41] Ethiopia | Qualitative research | 52 key informant interviews, 6 senior-level stakeholder interviews, 31 focus group discussions | 6-23 months | Community based, Kebele | Yamey framework | Implementation theories (in designing, planning, evaluating and interpretation of intervention results) |
Norton 2021 [40] Australia | Mixed methods | 26 child health nurses | 2-6 years | Community health centre | The integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) | Implementation theories (in designing intervention) |
Eldridge 2017 [33] USA | Qualitative research | 12 clinics; 47 staff | Breastfeeding children | WIC-clinics across NY State (n=12) | Created own data analysis using concepts from organisational theory and the YCDI logic model | Determinant framework and classic theories |
Murtha 2021 [39] Australia | Mixed methods | 80 participants from 24 early care and education and other child-related services attended the LEAPS training. 63 participants completed the evaluation | 0-5 years in ECEC | Early care and education and other child-related services | Project logic model and RE-AIM | Evaluation frameworks |
Moucherard 2020 [38] Bangladesh | Mixed methods | 668 health workers - surveys 269 service observation checklists 218 focus groups and interviews with stakeholders and health worker supervisors - | <2 years | Household visits (Bangladesh); facility-based social franchises (Vietnam) | Developed own conceptual framework | Determinant framework And Evaluation framework |
Gladstone 2018 [34] Malawi | Mixed methods | 6 HSAs; 56 pre- and post-children; 20 caregiver interviews | <2 years | Community and home-based setting. Mangochi (rural) Blantyre (urban) | Medical Research Council (MRC) Framework for complex interventions | Evaluation frameworks |
Luecking 2021 [37] USA | Mixed methods | Convenience sample of 92 early care and education centres (n = 48 intervention group, n = 44 delayed control group). Participants included (n = 189 providers, n = 446 parents) | 3-4 years | Early care and education centres | Fidelity index | Process models |
Sarma 2021 [42] Bangladesh | Mixed methods | Caregivers of children 6-59 months, community health workers, and BRAC staff members | 6-59 months | 164 sub-districts and 6 urban slums in Bangladesh | Program Impact Pathway (PIP) | Implementation theories (in planning intervention evaluation) |
Heerman 2018 [36] USA | Mixed methods | 26 parent-child (3-5 years) pairs | 3-5 years | 3 local parks and recreation centres | RE-AIM | Evaluation frameworks |
Harms 2021 [35] Netherlands | Mixed methods | 427 children (2-4 years) from 12 intervention pre-schools. In-depth parent interviews = 15, In-depth implementers interviews = 3, Questionnaire: physical home environment = 41, Questionnaire: intervention appreciation = 19 | 2-4 years | SuperFIT Family component: home environment. Overarching program also has a preschool component | RE-AIM | Evaluation frameworks |
Swindle 2021 [43] USA | Hybrid type III Implementation study | Educators across 9 early care and education sites included in a federally funded Head Start program. 4 sites, 20 classrooms, 39 educators, and 305 children received Enhanced support. 5 sites, 18 classrooms, 36 educators, and 316 children received Basic support | <5 years | Early care and education centres (one agency) | RE-AIM | Evaluation frameworks |