Abstract
Background Engaging in regular physical activity requires continued complex decision-making in varied and dynamic individual, social and structural contexts. Widespread shortfalls of physical activity interventions suggests the complex underlying mechanisms of change are not yet fully understood. More insightful process evaluations are needed to design and implement more effective approaches. This paper describes the protocol for a process evaluation of the JU:MP programme, a whole systems approach to increasing physical activity in children and young people aged 5-14 years in North Bradford, UK.
Methods This process evaluation, underpinned by realist philosophy, aims to understand the development and implementation of the JU:MP programme and the mechanisms by which JU:MP influences physical activity in children and young people. It also aims to explore behaviour change across wider policy, strategy and neighbourhood systems. A mixed method data collection approach will include semi-structured interview, observation, documentary analysis, surveys, and participatory evaluation methods including reflections and ripple effect mapping.
Discussion Not only is this an innovative approach to process evaluation but it will also feed into iterative programme development to generate evidence-based practice and deliver practice-based evidence. This paper advances knowledge regarding the development of process evaluations for evaluating systems interventions, and emphasises the importance of process evaluation.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The authors involvement was supported by Sport Englands Local Delivery Pilot- Bradford; weblink: https://www.sportengland.org/campaigns-and-our-work/local-delivery. Sport England is a non-departmental public body under the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). James Nobles time was supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West). The views expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of Sport England, DCMS, NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
University of Bradford ethics committee
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The dataset that will be generated and analysed during the current study are not publicly available to reserve the anonymity of research participants.
5.0 Abbreviations
- BCW
- Behaviour Change Wheel
- COM-B
- Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour
- DD
- Direct Delivery
- JU:MP
- Join Us: Move. Play
- LDP
- Local Delivery Pilot
- REM
- Ripple Effects Mapping
