Between worst and best: developing criteria to identify promising practices in health promotion and disease prevention for the Canadian Best Practices Portal

Abstract

Introduction In health promotion and chronic disease prevention, both best and promising practices can provide critical insights into what works for enhancing the healthrelated outcomes of individuals and communities, and how/why these practices work in different situations and contexts. Methods The promising practices criteria were developed using the Public Health Agency of Canada’s (PHAC’s) existing best practices criteria as the foundation. They were modified and pilot tested (three rounds) using published interventions. Theoretical and methodological issues and challenges were resolved via consultation and in-depth discussions with a working group. Results The team established a set of promising practices criteria, which differentiated from the best practices criteria via six specific measures. Conclusion While a number of complex challenges emerged in the development of these criteria, they were thoroughly discussed, debated and resolved. The Canadian Best Practices Portal’s screening criteria allow one to screen for both best and promising practices in the fields of public health, health promotion, chronic disease prevention, and potentially beyond.

A Systematic Review of Help-Seeking Interventions for Parents of Adolescents

“…As outlined in this review, parents are an important avenue for intervention, but to date, the evidence has been limited regarding what types of interventions are effective and should be implemented with parents. Based on the criteria outlined by Fazal et al [32], we have identified four promising interventions [28,42,50,53], all of which relate to aspects of adolescent mental health. Hurley et al [53] demonstrated that a once-off mental health literacy intervention could increase parental mental health help-seeking knowledge.…”

“…Replication of the aforementioned studies with different samples in different contexts is needed to determine if the results of such intervention studies generalize to other populations and situations [32]. Fazal et al [32] indicates that if a promising intervention repeatedly shows it has a positive impact overtime on the desired outcome, it can be deemed best practice.…”

“…"Promising intervention" refers to interventions whose content has a strong evidence-base, which are evaluated as having a strong methodology, and with an outcome which includes a significant positive change in help-seeking. The term has been used in the literature to describe an intervention that shows potential for development into best practice [32]. Based on adapted criteria set out by Fazal et al [32], a study was classified as a promising intervention when (1) the intervention was based on evidence-based guidelines, models, theory, or research; (2) the quality of the methodology was evaluated as moderate or strong; and (3) a statistically significant difference was noted in help-seeking knowledge, attitudes, intentions, or behaviors over time between the intervention group and the control group.…”

“…An alternative question was planned for this eventuality: a. Are there any "promising interventions" [32] that should be replicated to develop best practice guidelines for parental help-seeking interventions? 3.…”

Co-creating opportunities to incorporate cessation for electronic nicotine delivery systems in family medicine – a qualitative program evaluation

“…For the purpose of this study, opportunities were defined as an “intervention, program/service, strategy, or policy that shows potential” to improve how ENDS cessation is incorporated into family medicine by addressing a challenge or using practices successfully implemented by the participants. We use this definition so as not to misconstrue these opportunities with best practices which require repeated demonstration of positive impact [ 27 ]. This is in alignment with Nesta’s level one standards of evidence, which states that “you can describe what you do and why it matters, logically, coherently, and convincingly” but not that “you have data that shows positive change [ 28 ].”…”