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