Developing logic models to inform public health policy outcome evaluation: an example from tobacco control

Rationale for the shielding policy for clinically vulnerable people in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Shielding aimed to protect those predicted to be at highest risk from COVID-19 and was uniquely implemented in the UK during the first year of the pandemic from March 2020. As the first stage in the EVITE Immunity evaluation (Effects of shielding for vulnerable people during COVID-19 pandemic on health outcomes, costs and immunity, including those with cancer:quasi-experimental evaluation), we generated a logic model to describe the programme theory underlying the shielding intervention.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

We reviewed published documentation on shielding to develop an initial draft of the logic model. We then discussed this draft during interviews with 13 key stakeholders involved in putting shielding into effect in Wales and England. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically to inform a final draft of the logic model.

RESULTS

The shielding intervention was a complex one, introduced at pace by multiple agencies working together. We identified three core components: agreement on clinical criteria; development of the list of people appropriate for shielding; and communication of shielding advice. In addition, there was a support programme, available as required to shielding people, including food parcels, financial support and social support. The predicted mechanism of change was that people would isolate themselves and so avoid infection, with the primary intended outcome being reduction in mortality in the shielding group. Unintended impacts included negative impact on mental and physical health and well-being. Details of the intervention varied slightly across the home nations of the UK and were subject to minor revisions during the time the intervention was in place.

CONCLUSIONS

Shielding was a largely untested strategy, aiming to mitigate risk by placing a responsibility on individuals to protect themselves. The model of its rationale, components and outcomes (intended and unintended) will inform evaluation of the impact of shielding and help us to understand its effect and limitations.

A qualitative descriptive study of a novel nurse-led skin cancer screening model in rural Australia

Background

People residing in rural areas have higher rates of skin cancer and face barriers to accessing care. Models of skin cancer care addressing the specific needs of rural communities and overcoming specific challenges are required, but literature is scarce. This study aimed to describe the elements of a nurse-led skin cancer model in rural Victoria using qualitative methodology and programme logic to inform implementation and ongoing sustainability.

Methods

Qualitative descriptive design. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with key stakeholders involved in the skin cancer model, namely health service executive management, clinical staff, and administration staff. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were thematically analysed independently by two researchers before themes were compared and refined. A programme logic model was developed to organise themes into contextual elements, inputs, activities and anticipated outcomes; it was also used as a visual tool to aid discussions with key stakeholders. Member checking of the logic model occurred to verify interpretation. This programme logic model will be refined throughout the implementation phase, and again after three years of service delivery.

Results

Eight stakeholders participated in interviews. Thematic analysis identified three major themes: the influence of the local rural context, the elements of the model, and “making it happen’. These major themes and accompanying sub-themes were mapped to the programme logic model by contextual elements (rural locale, health service access barriers, burden of disease), key inputs (promotion, human resources including appropriate nurse training and leadership) and ‘making it happen’ (governance including referral pathways, flexible and sustained funding, and partnerships). The anticipated outcomes identified include skin cancer care delivered locally, timely access, career development for nurses, and decreased skin cancer burden.

Conclusion

An initiative that is place-based and community driven in response to consumer demand addresses key system barriers to earlier detection of skin cancers. It is anticipated to result in flow-on reductions in skin cancer disease burden. Programme logic was useful to both describe the initiative and as a visual tool for discussions, with the potential to inform wider health service efforts to address system barriers and bottlenecks.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08411-6.