Skip Navigation



Health Education Research Advance Access published online on March 26, 2009
Health Education Research, doi:10.1093/her/cyp017
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Griffin, S. F.
Right arrow Articles by Rheaume, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Griffin, S. F.
Right arrow Articles by Rheaume, C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Results from the Active for Life process evaluation: program delivery fidelity and adaptations

Sarah F. Griffin1,*, Sara Wilcox2, Marcia G. Ory3, Diana Lattimore4, Laura Leviton5, Cynthia Castro6, Ruth Ann Carpenter7 and Carol Rheaume2

1 Department of Public Health Sciences, Clemson University, 507 Edwards Hall, Clemson, SC 29634, USA
2 Department of Exercise Science, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA
3 School of Rural Public Health, Texas A & M University, College Station, TX, USA
4 Department of Exercise and Sports Science, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
5 Research and Evaluation, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Princeton, NJ, USA
6 Prevention Research Center, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
7 Health Integrations, Dallas, TX, USA

Correspondence to: * Correspondence to: S. A. Griffin. E-mail: sgriffi{at}clemson.edu

Active for Life® (AFL) was a large (n = 8159) translational initiative to increase physical activity (PA) in midlife and older adults. Translational research calls for a shift in emphasis from just understanding what works (efficacy) to also understanding how it works in more ‘real world’ settings. This article describes the process evaluation design and findings, discuss how these findings were used to better understand the translational process and provide a set of process evaluation recommendations with community-based translational research. AFL community organizations across the United States implemented one of two evidence-based PA programs (Active Living Every Day—The Cooper Institute; Human Kinetics Inc. or Active Choices—Stanford University). Both programs were based on the transtheoretical model and social cognitive theory. Overall, the process evaluation revealed high-dose delivery and implementation fidelity by quite varied community organizations serving diverse adult populations. Findings reveal most variation occurred for program elements requiring more participant engagement. Additionally, the results show how a collaborative process allowed the organizations to ‘fit’ the programs to their specific participant base while maintaining fidelity to essential program elements.

Received on August 11, 2008; accepted on February 23, 2009


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.