Conditions for the Successful Integration of an eHealth Tool "StopBlues" Into Community-Based Interventions in France: Results From a Multiple Correspondence Analysis

Kathleen Turmaine, Agnès Dumas, Karine Chevreul, PRINTEMPS Consortium, Corinne Alberti, Philippe Courtet, Coralie Gandré, Bruno Giraudeau, Anaïs Le Jeannic, Jean-Luc Roelandt, Guillaume Vaiva, Marie-Amélie Vinet, Kathleen Turmaine, Agnès Dumas, Karine Chevreul, PRINTEMPS Consortium, Corinne Alberti, Philippe Courtet, Coralie Gandré, Bruno Giraudeau, Anaïs Le Jeannic, Jean-Luc Roelandt, Guillaume Vaiva, Marie-Amélie Vinet

Abstract

Background: For over a decade, digital health has held promise for enabling broader access to health information, education, and services for the general population at a lower cost. However, recent studies have shown mixed results leading to a certain disappointment regarding the benefits of eHealth technologies. In this context, community-based health promotion represents an interesting and efficient conceptual framework that could help increase the adoption of digital health solutions and facilitate their evaluation.

Objective: To understand how the local implementation of the promotion of an eHealth tool, StopBlues (SB), aimed at preventing psychological distress and suicide, varied according to local contexts and if the implementation was related to the use of the tool.

Methods: The study was nested within a cluster-randomized controlled trial that was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the promotion, with before and after observation (NCT03565562). Data from questionnaires, observations, and institutional sources were collected in 27 localities where SB was implemented. A multiple correspondence analysis was performed to assess the relations between context, type of implementation and promotion, and use of the tool.

Results: Three distinct promotion patterns emerged according to the profiles of the localities that were associated with specific SB utilization rates. From highest to lowest utilization rates, they are listed as follows: the privileged urban localities, investing in health that implemented a high-intensity and digital promotion, demonstrating a greater capacity to take ownership of the project; the urban, but less privileged localities that, in spite of having relatively little experience in health policy implementation, managed to implement a traditional and high-intensity promotion; and the rural localities, with little experience in addressing health issues, that implemented low-intensity promotion but could not overcome the challenges associated with their local context.

Conclusions: These findings indicate the substantial influence of local context on the reception of digital tools. The urban and socioeconomic status profiles of the localities, along with their investment and pre-existing experience in health, appear to be critical for shaping the promotion and implementation of eHealth tools in terms of intensity and use of digital communication. The more digital channels used, the higher the utilization rates, ultimately leading to the overall success of the intervention.

International registered report identifier (irrid): RR2-10.1186/s13063-020-04464-2.

Keywords: community participation; eHealth; health promotion; internet-based intervention; mental health; prevention.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

©Kathleen Turmaine, Agnès Dumas, Karine Chevreul, PRINTEMPS Consortium. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 22.04.2022.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The intervention timelines. GP: general practitioner; SB: StopBlues.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Biplot of the explored variable modalities and typology of the localities.

References

    1. Jacobs RJ, Lou JQ, Ownby RL, Caballero J. A systematic review of eHealth interventions to improve health literacy. Health Informatics J. 2016 Jun 10;22(2):81–98. doi: 10.1177/1460458214534092. 1460458214534092
    1. Ahern DK, Kreslake JM, Phalen JM. What is eHealth (6): perspectives on the evolution of eHealth research. J Med Internet Res. 2006 Mar 31;8(1):e4. doi: 10.2196/jmir.8.1.e4. v8i1e4
    1. Carlo AD, Hosseini Ghomi R, Renn BN, Areán PA. By the numbers: ratings and utilization of behavioral health mobile applications. NPJ Digit Med. 2019 Jun 17;2(1):54. doi: 10.1038/s41746-019-0129-6. doi: 10.1038/s41746-019-0129-6.129
    1. Baumel A, Muench F, Edan S, Kane JM. Objective User Engagement With Mental Health Apps: Systematic Search and Panel-Based Usage Analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2019 Sep 25;21(9):e14567. doi: 10.2196/14567. v21i9e14567
    1. Albrecht U, von Jan U. Safe, sound and desirable: development of mHealth apps under the stress of rapid life cycles. Mhealth. 2017;3:27. doi: 10.21037/mhealth.2017.06.05. doi: 10.21037/-03-2017.06.05
    1. Becker S, Miron-Shatz T, Schumacher N, Krocza J, Diamantidis C, Albrecht U. mHealth 2.0: Experiences, Possibilities, and Perspectives. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2014 May 16;2(2):e24. doi: 10.2196/mhealth.3328. v2i2e24
    1. Almario CV. The Effect of Digital Health Technology on Patient Care and Research. Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y) 2017 Jul;13(7):437–439.
    1. Gorwood P. L’apport du numérique en santé mentale: beaucoup d’espoir, quelques inquiétudes. Soins Psychiatrie. 2017 Jul;38(311):12–15. doi: 10.1016/j.spsy.2017.04.006.
    1. Classification of Digital Health Interventions v 1. World Health Organization. 2018. [2021-10-08]. .
    1. Digital Health Software ¨Pre-certification (Pre-Cert) Program. U.S. Food &Drug Administration. [2020-10-08]. .
    1. Evidence standards framework for digital health technologies. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. [2020-10-08]. .
    1. Petticrew M. When are complex interventions 'complex'? When are simple interventions 'simple'? The European Journal of Public Health. 2011 Jul 18;21(4):397–398. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckr084.
    1. Jolley G. Evaluating complex community-based health promotion: Addressing the challenges. Evaluation and Program Planning. 2014 Aug;45:71–81. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2014.03.006.
    1. Poland B, Frohlich K, Cargo M. Potvin L, McQueen DV, Hall M, de Salazar L, Anderson LM, Hartz ZMA. editors. Health Promotion Evaluation Practices in the Americas Internet New York, NY: Springer New York; 2008. Context as a Fundamental Dimension of Health Promotion Program Evaluation.
    1. Farquhar J, Fortmann S. Community-based Health Promotion. In: Ahrens W, Pigeot I, editors. Handbook of Epidemiology. 1st edition. Heidelberg: Springer; 2005.
    1. Hegerl U, Wittenburg L, Arensman E, Van Audenhove C, Coyne JC, McDaid D, van der Feltz-Cornelis CM, Gusmão R, Kopp M, Maxwell M, Meise U, Roskar S, Sarchiapone M, Schmidtke A, Värnik A, Bramesfeld A. Optimizing suicide prevention programs and their implementation in Europe (OSPI Europe): an evidence-based multi-level approach. BMC Public Health. 2009 Nov 23;9:428. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-9-428. 1471-2458-9-428
    1. Székely A, Konkolÿ Thege B, Mergl R, Birkás E, Rózsa S, Purebl G, Hegerl U. How to decrease suicide rates in both genders? An effectiveness study of a community-based intervention (EAAD) PLoS One. 2013;8(9):e75081. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0075081. PONE-D-13-15027
    1. Ashton J, Grey P, Barnard K. Healthy cities — WHO's New Public Health initiative. Health Promot Int. 1986;1(3):319–324. doi: 10.1093/heapro/1.3.319.
    1. Lawlor E, Cupples M, Donnelly M, Tully M. Promoting physical activity among community groups of older women in socio-economically disadvantaged areas: randomised feasibility study. Trials. 2019 Apr 25;20(1):234. doi: 10.1186/s13063-019-3312-9. 10.1186/s13063-019-3312-9
    1. Jané-Llopis E, Barry MM. What makes mental health promotion effective? Promot Educ. 2005 Nov 02;Suppl 2(2_suppl):47–55, 64, 70. doi: 10.1177/10253823050120020108.
    1. Bulthuis S, Kok M, Raven J, Dieleman M. Factors influencing the scale-up of public health interventions in low- and middle-income countries: a qualitative systematic literature review. Health Policy Plan. 2020 Mar 01;35(2):219–234. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czz140. 5625103
    1. Granja C, Janssen W, Johansen MA. Factors Determining the Success and Failure of eHealth Interventions: Systematic Review of the Literature. J Med Internet Res. 2018 May 01;20(5):e10235. doi: 10.2196/10235. v20i5e10235
    1. Chou WS, Prestin A, Lyons C, Wen K. Web 2.0 for Health Promotion: Reviewing the Current Evidence. Am J Public Health. 2013 Jan;103(1):e9–e18. doi: 10.2105/ajph.2012.301071.
    1. McAuley A. Digital health interventions: widening access or widening inequalities? Public Health. 2014 Dec;128(12):1118–20. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2014.10.008.S0033-3506(14)00270-4
    1. Rowsell A, Muller I, Murray E, Little P, Byrne CD, Ganahl K, Müller G, Gibney S, Lyles CR, Lucas A, Nutbeam D, Yardley L. Views of People With High and Low Levels of Health Literacy About a Digital Intervention to Promote Physical Activity for Diabetes: A Qualitative Study in Five Countries. J Med Internet Res. 2015 Oct 12;17(10):e230. doi: 10.2196/jmir.4999. v17i10e230
    1. Teuscher D, Bukman AJ, van Baak MA, Feskens EJM, Renes RJ, Meershoek A. A lifestyle intervention study targeting individuals with low socioeconomic status of different ethnic origins: important aspects for successful implementation. BMC Public Health. 2017 Jul 25;18(1):54. doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4592-1. 10.1186/s12889-017-4592-1
    1. Jang K, Baek YM. How to effectively design public health interventions: Implications from the interaction effects between socioeconomic status and health locus of control beliefs on healthy dietary behaviours among US adults. Health Soc Care Community. 2018 Apr 16;26(5):664–674. doi: 10.1111/hsc.12577.
    1. Adler NE, Newman K. Socioeconomic disparities in health: pathways and policies. Health Aff (Millwood) 2002;21(2):60–76. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.21.2.60.
    1. Gandré C, Le Jeannic A, Vinet M, Turmaine K, Courtet P, Roelandt J, Vaiva G, Giraudeau B, Alberti C, Chevreul K. The PRINTEMPS study: protocol of a cluster-randomized controlled trial of the local promotion of a smartphone application and associated website for the prevention of suicidal behaviors in the adult general population in France. Trials. 2020 Jun 22;21(1):553. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04464-2. 10.1186/s13063-020-04464-2
    1. Glasgow RE, Lichtenstein E, Marcus AC. Why don't we see more translation of health promotion research to practice? Rethinking the efficacy-to-effectiveness transition. Am J Public Health. 2003 Aug;93(8):1261–7. doi: 10.2105/ajph.93.8.1261.
    1. Proctor E, Luke D, Calhoun A, McMillen C, Brownson R, McCrary S, Padek M. Sustainability of evidence-based healthcare: research agenda, methodological advances, and infrastructure support. Implementation Sci. 2015 Jun 11;10:88. doi: 10.1186/s13012-015-0274-5. 10.1186/s13012-015-0274-5
    1. Freudenberg N. Assessing the Public Health Impact of the mHealth App Business. Am J Public Health. 2017 Nov;107(11):1694–1696. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2017.304083.
    1. Singh K, Drouin K, Newmark LP, Lee J, Faxvaag A, Rozenblum R, Pabo EA, Landman A, Klinger E, Bates DW. Many Mobile Health Apps Target High-Need, High-Cost Populations, But Gaps Remain. Health Affairs. 2016 Dec;35(12):2310–2318. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2016.0578.
    1. Barusch A, Gringeri C, George M. Rigor in Qualitative Social Work Research: A Review of Strategies Used in Published Articles. Social Work Research. 2011 Mar 01;35(1):11–19. doi: 10.1093/swr/35.1.11.
    1. Cohen DJ, Crabtree BF. Evaluative criteria for qualitative research in health care: controversies and recommendations. Ann Fam Med. 2008;6(4):331–9. doi: 10.1370/afm.818. 6/4/331
    1. Escofier P, Pagès J. Analyses factorielles simples et multiples. Objectifs, méthodes et interprétation. Paris: Dunod; 2008.
    1. Le Lan R. Analyse de données et classification sur données d'enquête. Journées de Méthodologie Statistique-Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques. 2005. [2020-05-24]. .
    1. Macia L. Using Clustering as a Tool: Mixed Methods in Qualitative Data Analysis. TQR. 2015 Jul 20;20(7):1083–1094. doi: 10.46743/2160-3715/2015.2201.
    1. Cibois P. La Représentation factorielle des tableaux croisés et des données d'enquête : étude de méthodologie sociologique. Paris: Université Paris V René Descartes; 1980.
    1. Greenacre MJ. Correspondence Analysis in Practice. New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC; 2016. Dec 01,
    1. Rey G, Jougla E, Fouillet A, Hémon Denis. Ecological association between a deprivation index and mortality in France over the period 1997 - 2001: variations with spatial scale, degree of urbanicity, age, gender and cause of death. BMC Public Health. 2009 Jan 22;9:33. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-9-33. 1471-2458-9-33
    1. Temam S, Varraso R, Pornet C, Sanchez M, Affret A, Jacquemin B, Clavel-Chapelon F, Rey G, Rican S, Le Moual N. Ability of ecological deprivation indices to measure social inequalities in a French cohort. BMC Public Health. 2017 Dec 15;17(1):956. doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4967-3. 10.1186/s12889-017-4967-3
    1. Ghosn W. Note méthodologique : Indicateurs écologiques synthétiques du niveau socio-économique pour la recherche en Santé. Le CépiDc. 2018. [2020-06-05]. .
    1. Gorza M, Eilstein D. Outils élaborés dans la cadre du programme «Inégalités sociales de santé?»-2015. Santé Publique France. 2018. [2020-11-05]. .
    1. Clanché F, Rascol O. Le découpage en unités urbaines de 2010. L’espace urbain augmente de 19 % en une décennie. Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques. 2011. [2020-07-23]. .
    1. Di Franco G. Multiple correspondence analysis: one only or several techniques? Qual Quant. 2015 Apr 21;50(3):1299–1315. doi: 10.1007/s11135-015-0206-0.
    1. Contrats locaux de santé: Agir ensemble pour la santé des citoyens au cœur des territoires. Agence Régionale de Santé. 2012. [2020-07-23]. .
    1. Cros R. La mesure de la plus-value des CLS mis en oeuvre en Bretagne. Ecole des hautes études en santé publique. 2014. [2020-07-17]. .
    1. Guézennec P, Roelandt J. Les conseils locaux de santé mentale en France : état des lieux en 2015. L'information psychiatrique. 2015;91(7):549–556. doi: 10.1684/ipe.2015.1372.
    1. Bouhier G, Cadou-Plante B, Gallard R, Gouriff M, Gaston A, Niyomwungere C, Salsmann H. Évaluation du déploiement de la démarche d'évaluation des conseils Locaux en santé mentale. CLSM-CCOMS. 2018. [2020-10-01]. .
    1. Röthlin F, Schmied H, Dietscher C. Organizational capacities for health promotion implementation: results from an international hospital study. Health Promot Int. 2015 Jun 19;30(2):369–79. doi: 10.1093/heapro/dat048.dat048
    1. Santos C, Santos V, Tavares A, Varajão J. Project Management Success in Health – The Need of Additional Research in Public Health Projects. Procedia Technology. 2014;16:1080–1085. doi: 10.1016/j.protcy.2014.10.122.
    1. Dako-Gyeke P, Asampong E, Afari E, Launois P, Ackumey M, Opoku-Mensah K, Dery S, Akweongo P, Nonvignon J, Aikins M. Capacity building for implementation research: a methodology for advancing health research and practice. Health Res Policy Syst. 2020 Jun 01;18(1):53. doi: 10.1186/s12961-020-00568-y. 10.1186/s12961-020-00568-y
    1. van der Feltz-Cornelis CM, Sarchiapone M, Postuvan V, Volker D, Roskar S, Grum AT, Carli V, McDaid D, O'Connor R, Maxwell M, Ibelshäuser A, Van Audenhove C, Scheerder G, Sisask M, Gusmão R, Hegerl U. Best practice elements of multilevel suicide prevention strategies: a review of systematic reviews. Crisis. 2011 Nov 01;32(6):319–33. doi: 10.1027/0227-5910/a000109. T727415132845581
    1. Crutzen R, Roosjen JL, Poelman J. Using Google Analytics as a process evaluation method for Internet-delivered interventions: an example on sexual health. Health Promot Int. 2013 Mar;28(1):36–42. doi: 10.1093/heapro/das008.das008
    1. Gordon EJ, Shand J, Black A. Google analytics of a pilot mass and social media campaign targeting Hispanics about living kidney donation. Internet Interventions. 2016 Nov;6:40–49. doi: 10.1016/j.invent.2016.09.002.
    1. Clark D, Nicholas D, Jamali HR. Evaluating information seeking and use in the changing virtual world: the emerging role of Google Analytics. Learn. Pub. 2014 Jul 01;27(3):185–194. doi: 10.1087/20140304.
    1. Mukaka MM. Statistics corner: A guide to appropriate use of correlation coefficient in medical research. Malawi Med J. 2012 Sep;24(3):69–71.
    1. Lê S, Josse J, Husson F. FactoMineR: Package for Multivariate Analysis v 2.3. J Stat Soft. 2008;25(1):1–18. doi: 10.18637/jss.v025.i01.
    1. Vaissie P, Monge A, Husson F. Factoshiny: Perform Factorial Analysis from 'FactoMineR' with a Shiny Application. 2021. [2021-09-02]. .
    1. Kassambara A, Mundt F. factoextra: Extract and Visualize the Results of Multivariate Data Analyses. 2020. [2021-09-02]. .
    1. Dray S, Dufour A. The ade4 Package: Implementing the Duality Diagram for Ecologists v1.7-1. J Stat Soft. 2007;22(4):1–20. doi: 10.18637/jss.v022.i04.
    1. Leviton L C, Snell E, McGinnis M. Urban issues in health promotion strategies. Am J Public Health. 2000 Jun;90(6):863–6. doi: 10.2105/ajph.90.6.863.
    1. Lupton D. Health promotion in the digital era: a critical commentary. Health Promot Int. 2015 Mar;30(1):174–83. doi: 10.1093/heapro/dau091.dau091
    1. Jane M, Hagger M, Foster J, Ho S, Pal S. Social media for health promotion and weight management: a critical debate. BMC Public Health. 2018 Jul 28;18(1):932. doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-5837-3. 10.1186/s12889-018-5837-3
    1. Powell J, Clarke A. Internet information-seeking in mental health: population survey. Br J Psychiatry. 2006 Sep;189:273–7. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.105.017319. 189/3/273
    1. Gowen LK. Online Mental Health Information Seeking in Young Adults with Mental Health Challenges. Journal of Technology in Human Services. 2013 Apr;31(2):97–111. doi: 10.1080/15228835.2013.765533.
    1. Neal DM, Campbell AJ, Williams LY, Liu Y, Nussbaumer D. “I did not realize so many options are available”: Cognitive authority, emerging adults, and e-mental health. Library & Information Science Research. 2011 Jan;33(1):25–33. doi: 10.1016/j.lisr.2010.07.015.
    1. Korda H, Itani Z. Harnessing social media for health promotion and behavior change. Health Promot Pract. 2013 Jan;14(1):15–23. doi: 10.1177/1524839911405850.1524839911405850
    1. Graham JE, Moore JL, Bell RC, Miller T. Digital Marketing to Promote Healthy Weight Gain Among Pregnant Women in Alberta: An Implementation Study. J Med Internet Res. 2019 Feb 01;21(2):e11534. doi: 10.2196/11534. v21i2e11534
    1. Mehmet M, Roberts R, Nayeem T. Using digital and social media for health promotion: A social marketing approach for addressing co‐morbid physical and mental health. Aust. J. Rural Health. 2020 Jan 22;28(2):149–158. doi: 10.1111/ajr.12589.
    1. Simpson S, Reid C. Telepsychology in Australia: 2020 vision. Aust J Rural Health. 2014 Dec 10;22(6):306–309. doi: 10.1111/ajr.12103.
    1. Freeman B, Potente S, Rock V, McIver J. Social media campaigns that make a difference: what can public health learn from the corporate sector and other social change marketers? Public Health Res Pract. 2015 Mar 30;25(2):e2521517. doi: 10.17061/phrp2521517. doi: 10.17061/phrp2521517.2521517
    1. Park A, Bowling J, Shaw G, Li C, Chen S. Adopting Social Media for Improving Health: Opportunities and Challenges. N C Med J. 2019;80(4):240–243. doi: 10.18043/ncm.80.4.240. 80/4/240
    1. Hiscock R, Bauld L, Amos A, Fidler J, Munafò M. Socioeconomic status and smoking: a review. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2012 Feb;1248:107–23. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06202.x.
    1. Laing SS, Alsayid M, Ocampo C, Baugh S. Mobile Health Technology Knowledge and Practices Among Patients of Safety-Net Health Systems in Washington State and Washington, DC. J Patient Cent Res Rev. 2018;5(3):204–217. doi: 10.17294/2330-0698.1622. jpcrr-5_3-204
    1. Levy H, Janke AT, Langa KM. Health literacy and the digital divide among older Americans. J Gen Intern Med. 2015 Mar;30(3):284–9. doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-3069-5.
    1. White M, Adams J, Heywood P. How and why do interventions that increase health overall widen inequalities within populations? In: Babones S, editor. Social Inequality and Public Health. 1st edition. Bristol: Policy Press; 2009. pp. 65–82.
    1. Bolin JN, Bellamy GR, Ferdinand AO, Vuong AM, Kash BA, Schulze A, Helduser JW. Rural Healthy People 2020: New Decade, Same Challenges. J Rural Health. 2015;31(3):326–33. doi: 10.1111/jrh.12116.
    1. Umstattd Meyer MR, Perry CK, Sumrall JC, Patterson MS, Walsh SM, Clendennen SC, Hooker SP, Evenson KR, Goins KV, Heinrich KM, O'Hara Tompkins N, Eyler AA, Jones S, Tabak R, Valko C. Physical Activity-Related Policy and Environmental Strategies to Prevent Obesity in Rural Communities: A Systematic Review of the Literature, 2002-2013. Prev Chronic Dis. 2016 Jan 07;13:E03. doi: 10.5888/pcd13.150406. E03
    1. White D. Development of a rural health framework: implications for program service planning and delivery. Healthc Policy. 2013 Feb;8(3):27–41.
    1. Legleye S, Rolland A. Une personne sur six n'utilise pas Internet, plus d'un usager sur trois manque de compétences numériques de base. Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques. 2019. [2020-12-15]. .
    1. Vogels E. Some digital divides persist between rural, urban and suburban America. Pew Research Center. 2021. This is an update of an analysis by Andrew Perrin originally accessed on 2020-12-15
    1. Sabau C, Blasquiet-Revol H, Lenain M-A. Les personnes âgées dans les territoires ruraux : une double opportunité pour la création d'activités et d'emplois de service. Gérontologie et société. 2010;33(135):239–258. doi: 10.3917/gs.135.0239.
    1. Wenger GC. Myths and realities of ageing in rural Britain. Ageing and Society. 2001 May 18;21(1):117–130. doi: 10.1017/s0144686x01008042.
    1. Norman CD, Skinner HA. eHealth Literacy: Essential Skills for Consumer Health in a Networked World. J Med Internet Res. 2006 Jun;8(2):e9. doi: 10.2196/jmir.8.2.e9. v8i2e9
    1. Xie B. Effects of an eHealth literacy intervention for older adults. J Med Internet Res. 2011 Nov;13(4):e90. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1880. v13i4e90
    1. Tennant B, Stellefson M, Dodd V, Chaney B, Chaney D, Paige S, Alber J. eHealth literacy and Web 2.0 health information seeking behaviors among baby boomers and older adults. J Med Internet Res. 2015 Mar;17(3):e70. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3992. v17i3e70
    1. Frohlich KL, Potvin L. Transcending the known in public health practice: the inequality paradox: the population approach and vulnerable populations. Am J Public Health. 2008 Feb;98(2):216–21. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2007.114777.AJPH.2007.114777
    1. Leyrat C, Morgan K, Leurent B, Kahan B. Cluster randomized trials with a small number of clusters: which analyses should be used? Int J Epidemiol. 2018 Feb 01;47(1):321–331. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyx169.4091562
    1. Eldridge SM, Ashby D, Feder GS, Rudnicka AR, Ukoumunne OC. Lessons for cluster randomized trials in the twenty-first century: a systematic review of trials in primary care. Clin Trials. 2004 Feb;1(1):80–90. doi: 10.1191/1740774504cn006rr.
    1. Latkin CA, Edwards C, Davey-Rothwell MA, Tobin KE. The relationship between social desirability bias and self-reports of health, substance use, and social network factors among urban substance users in Baltimore, Maryland. Addict Behav. 2017 Oct;73:133–136. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2017.05.005. S0306-4603(17)30175-2
    1. Coughlin SS. Recall bias in epidemiologic studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 1990;43(1):87–91. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(90)90060-3.0895-4356(90)90060-3
    1. Target geographical locations for delivery. Google Ad Manager Help. [2020-07-26]. .
    1. Costa PS, Santos NC, Cunha P, Cotter J, Sousa N. The Use of Multiple Correspondence Analysis to Explore Associations between Categories of Qualitative Variables in Healthy Ageing. J Aging Res. 2013;2013:302163. doi: 10.1155/2013/302163. doi: 10.1155/2013/302163.
    1. Xiao C, Ye J, Esteves RM, Rong C. Using Spearman's correlation coefficients for exploratory data analysis on big dataset. Concurrency Computat: Pract Exper. 2015 Dec 18;28(14):3866–3878. doi: 10.1002/cpe.3745.
    1. Krehbiel TC. Correlation Coefficient Rule of Thumb. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education. 2004 Jan 16;2(1):97–100. doi: 10.1111/j.0011-7315.2004.00025.x.
    1. Henry D, Dymnicki AB, Mohatt N, Allen J, Kelly JG. Clustering Methods with Qualitative Data: a Mixed-Methods Approach for Prevention Research with Small Samples. Prev Sci. 2015 Oct;16(7):1007–16. doi: 10.1007/s11121-015-0561-z. 10.1007/s11121-015-0561-z
    1. Birnbaum ML, Garrett C, Baumel A, Scovel M, Rizvi AF, Muscat W, Kane JM. Using Digital Media Advertising in Early Psychosis Intervention. Psychiatr Serv. 2017 Jul 17;:appips201600571. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201600571.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe