Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Refereed
Title: How can we adapt complex population health interventions for new contexts? Progressing debates and research priorities
Author(s): Evans, Rhiannon Emily
Moore, Graham
Movsisyan, Ani
Rehfuess, Eva
ADAPT Panel,
Keywords: Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Issue Date: 27-Sep-2020
Citation: Evans RE, Moore G, Movsisyan A, Rehfuess E & ADAPT Panel (2020) How can we adapt complex population health interventions for new contexts? Progressing debates and research priorities. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.
Abstract: Introduction The UK Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research have funded the ADAPT study (2018–2020), to develop methodological guidance for the adaptation of complex population health interventions for new contexts. While there have been advances in frameworks, there are key theoretical and methodological debates to progress. The ADAPT study convened a panel meeting to identify and enrich these debates. This paper presents the panel’s discussions and suggests directions for future research. Methods Sixteen researchers and one policymaker convened for a 1-day meeting in July 2019. The aim was to reflect on emerging study findings (systematic review of adaptation guidance; scoping review of case examples; and qualitative interviews with funders, journal editors, researchers and policymakers), progress theoretical and methodological debates, and consider where innovation may be required to address research gaps. Discussion Despite the proliferation of adaptation frameworks, questions remain over the definition of basic concepts (eg, adaptation). The rationale for adaptation, which often focuses on differences between contexts, may lead to adaptation hyperactivity. Equal emphasis should be placed on similarities. Decision-making about intervention modification currently privileges the concept of ‘core components’, and work is needed to progress the use and operationalisation of ‘functional fidelity’. Language and methods must advance to ensure meaningful engagement with diverse stakeholders in adaptation processes. Further guidance is required to assess the extent of re-evaluation required in the new context. A better understanding of different theoretical perspectives, notably complex systems thinking, implementation science and realist evaluation may help in enhancing research on adaptation.
DOI Link: 10.1136/jech-2020-214468
Rights: © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See:
Notes: Output Status: Forthcoming/Available Online The ADAPT Panel comprises of Laura Arnold, Julie Bishop, Andrew Booth, Lauren Copeland, Peter Craig, Frances Gardner, Penny Hawe, Pat Hoddinott, Frank Kee, Hannah Littlecott, Laurence Moore, Simon Murphy, Alicia O’ Cathain
Licence URL(s):

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
jech-2020-214468.full.pdfFulltext - Published Version210.26 kBAdobe 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.

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