Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/30533
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHawkes, Rhiannonen_UK
dc.contributor.authorCameron, Elaineen_UK
dc.contributor.authorBower, Peteren_UK
dc.contributor.authorFrench, David Pen_UK
dc.date.accessioned2019-12-13T01:00:38Z-
dc.date.available2019-12-13T01:00:38Z-
dc.date.issued2020-08en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/30533-
dc.description.abstractAims To assess fidelity of the Healthier You: NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS‐DPP), a behavioural intervention for people in England at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes, to the specified programme features. Methods Document analysis of the NHS‐DPP programme specification, including National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) PH38 diabetes prevention guidance. This was compared with the intervention design (framework response documents and programme manuals) from all four independent providers delivering the NHS‐DPP. Documents were coded using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication framework (describing service parameters) and the Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy v1. Results Providers demonstrated good fidelity to service parameters of the NHS‐DPP. The NHS‐DPP specification indicated 19 unique behaviour change techniques. Framework responses for the four providers contained between 24 and 32 distinct behaviour change techniques, and programme manuals contained between 23 and 45 distinct behaviour change techniques, indicating variation in behaviour change content between providers’ intervention documents. Thus, each provider planned to deliver 74% of the unique behaviour change techniques specified, and a large amount of behaviour change content not mandated. Conclusions There is good fidelity to the specified service parameters of the NHS‐DPP; however, the four providers planned to deliver approximately three‐quarters of behaviour change techniques specified by the NHS‐DPP. Given that behaviour change techniques are the ‘active ingredients’ of interventions, and some of these techniques in the programme manuals may be missed in practice, this highlights possible limitations with fidelity to the NHS‐DPP programme specification at the intervention design stage.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherWileyen_UK
dc.relationHawkes R, Cameron E, Bower P & French DP (2020) Does the design of the NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme intervention have fidelity to the programme specification? A document analysis. Diabetic Medicine, 37 (8), pp. 1357-1366. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.14201en_UK
dc.rights© 2019 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Diabetes UK. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.en_UK
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_UK
dc.titleDoes the design of the NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme intervention have fidelity to the programme specification? A document analysisen_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.rights.embargodate2019-12-12en_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/dme.14201en_UK
dc.identifier.pmid31808578en_UK
dc.citation.jtitleDiabetic Medicineen_UK
dc.citation.issn1464-5491en_UK
dc.citation.issn0742-3071en_UK
dc.citation.volume37en_UK
dc.citation.issue8en_UK
dc.citation.spage1357en_UK
dc.citation.epage1366en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusVoR - Version of Recorden_UK
dc.contributor.funderNational Institute for Health Researchen_UK
dc.author.emailelaine.cameron@stir.ac.uken_UK
dc.citation.date06/12/2019en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Manchesteren_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationPsychologyen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Manchesteren_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Manchesteren_UK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000505321100001en_UK
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-85078593232en_UK
dc.identifier.wtid1493070en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-8959-5148en_UK
dc.date.accepted2019-12-04en_UK
dcterms.dateAccepted2019-12-04en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2019-12-12en_UK
rioxxterms.apcnot requireden_UK
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_UK
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_UK
local.rioxx.authorHawkes, Rhiannon|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorCameron, Elaine|0000-0002-8959-5148en_UK
local.rioxx.authorBower, Peter|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorFrench, David P|en_UK
local.rioxx.projectProject ID unknown|National Institute for Health Research|http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272en_UK
local.rioxx.freetoreaddate2019-12-12en_UK
local.rioxx.licencehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/|2019-12-12|en_UK
local.rioxx.filenamedme.14201.pdfen_UK
local.rioxx.filecount1en_UK
local.rioxx.source1464-5491en_UK
Appears in Collections:Psychology Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
dme.14201.pdfFulltext - Published Version10.9 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.