Skip to main content

Table 2 Individual- and staff/setting-level RE-AIM dimensions by targeted behavioral outcome summary table

From: Fidelity to and comparative results across behavioral interventions evaluated through the RE-AIM framework: a systematic review

Dimension

Indicators

Multiple behavioral outcomes (n = 26)

Weight (n = 2)

Disease self-management (n = 4)

Physical activity (n = 8)

Diet (n = 4)

Smoking/substance (n = 12)

Others (n = 10)

No individual behavior outcome (n = 16)

Total across all behaviors (N = 82)

Reach

Average participation rate

49 % (±25) Studies (n = 18)

19 % (±12) Studies (n = 2)

24 % (±31) Studies (n = 2)

54 % (±26) Studies (n = 4)

N/A

52 % (±34) Studies (n = 6)

30 % (±18) Studies (n = 6)

44 % (±27) Studies (n = 11)

45 % (±28) Studies (n = 45)

Average number of comparisons between participants and nonparticipants

4.92 (±4.07) R 113 Studies (n = 13)

N/A

N/A

3.75 (±2.50) R 17 Studies (n = 4)

2.00 (±1.41) R 13 Studies (n = 2)

5.00 (±3.00) R 28 Studies (n = 3)

2.00 (±21.73) R 14 Studies (n = 3)

1.75 (±0.95) R 13 Studies (n = 4)

4.01 (±3.53) R 1–13 Studies (n = 39)

Average number of significant comparisons

1.63 (±0.74) R 13 Studies (n = 8)

N/A

N/A

2.00 (±1.41) R 13 Studies (n = 2)

N/A

2.50 (±2.12) R 14 Studies (n = 2)

N/A

N/A

1.05 (±1.4) R 013 Studies (n = 39)

Effectiveness

Measure of primary outcome

Positive (n = 20) null (n = 3) misreport (n = 0) not reported (n = 3)

Positive (n = 2) null (n = 0) misreport (n = 0) not reported (n = 0)

Positive (n = 2) null (n = 0) misreport (n = 0) not reported (n = 2)

Positive (n = 6) null (n = 1) misreport (n = 1) not reported (n = 0)

Positive (n = 4) null (n = 0) misreport (n = 0) not reported (n = 0)

Positive (n = 8) null (n = 1) misreport (n = 1) not reported (n = 2)

Positive (n = 6) null (n = 1) misreport (n = 3) not reported (n = 0)

N/A (n = 8) misreport (n = 8)

Positive (n =48) null (n = 6) misreport (n = 13) not reported (n = 7) N/A (n = 8)

Maintenancea

Measure of primary outcome ≥6 months post-treatment

Improved outcome from baseline to follow-up (n = 6) not reported (n = 20)

Improved outcome from baseline to follow-up (n = 0) not reported (n = 2)

Improved outcome from baseline to follow-up (n = 0) not reported (n = 4)

Improved outcome from baseline to follow-up (n = 1) not reported (n = 7)

Improved outcome from baseline to follow-up (n = 0) not reported (n = 4)

Improved outcome from baseline to follow-up (n = 2) not reported (n = 10)

Improved outcome from baseline to follow-up (n = 0) not reported (n = 10)

Improved outcome from baseline to follow-up (n = 0) not reported (n = 16)

Improved outcome from baseline to follow-up (n = 9) not reported (n = 73)

Adoption

Average percentage of settings approached that participate

73 % (±35) Studies (n = 12)

N/A

93 % (±10) Studies (n = 2)

65 % (±37) Studies (n = 5)

N/A

68 % (±33) Studies (n = 3)

95 % (±7) Studies (n = 5)

56 % (±40) Studies (n = 5)

75 % (±32) (n = 33)

Average number of comparisons between participating sites compared with nonparticipating

2.60 (±2.19) R 15 Studies (n = 5)

N/A

N/A

2.50 (±2.07) R 16 Studies (n = 6)

N/A

N/A

1.00 (±0.00) Studies (n = 2)

1.00 (±0.00) Studies (n = 3)

0.56 (±0.98) Studies (n = 32)

Average number of significant comparisons

1.0 (± .25) R 05 Studies (n = 4)

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

1.00 (±0.00) Studies (n = 2)

0.32 (±0.58) Studies (n = 20)

Percent of staff offered that participate

76 % (±32) Studies (n = 5)

N/A

N/A

85 % (±22) Studies (n = 3)

N/A

N/A

95 % (±7) Studies (n = 3)

85 % (±15) Studies (n = 3)

79 % (±28) Studies (n = 12)

Characteristics of staff participants vs nonparticipating staff or typical staff

2.50 (±2.12) R 13 Studies (n = 2)

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

1.00 (±0.00) Studies (n = 5)

1.92 (±1.68) Studies (n = 12)

Average number of significant comparisons

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

0.08 (±0.29) Studies (n = 12)

Implementation

Measure of implementation fidelity

Description (n = 5) Percentage (n = 10) M = 87 % (±17)

Description (n = 1) Percentage (n = 1)

Description (n = 1)

Description (n = 2) Percentage (n = 4) M = 71 % (±12.23)

Percentage (n = 1)

Description (n = 1) Percentage (n = 3) M = 84 % (±10.40)

Description (n = 1) Percentage (n = 2) M = 76 % (±33.23)

Description (n = 5)

Those that described (n = 21) Average percentage 82 % (±16)

Cost of implementation—money

n = 2 (1) $547 per person, (2) “low cost”

n = 1 Lay health educators and free program materials

n = 0

n = 0

n = 0

n = 0

n = 0

n = 3 (1) $6.91/person, (2) low ongoing costs, (3) 266,000 Euros for 3 years

Costs reported in six studies

Maintenanceb

Reported if program is still ongoing at ≥6 months post-treatment

Studies (n = 1)

Studies (n = 1)

Studies (n = 0)

Studies (n = 5)

Studies (n = 3)

Studies (n = 1)

Studies (n = 3)

Studies (n = 7)

Studies (n = 27)

  1. N/A Not applicable
  2. aOrganizational
  3. bIndividual