Cited by 29Health Policy Implementation ScienceCommunity Health and DevelopmentSchool Health and Nursing Education

Dimensions of sustainability for a health communication intervention in African American churches: a multi-methods study

Open access
Scheirer, Mary Ann, Santos, Sherie Lou Z., Tagai, Erin K., Bowie, Janice, Slade, Jimmie, Carter, Roxanne, Holt, Cheryl L.·2017·Implementation Science

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Sustainability of evidence-based health promotion interventions has received increased research attention in recent years. This paper reports sustainability data from Project HEAL (Health through Early Awareness and Learning) a cancer communication implementation trial about early detection, based in African American churches. In this paper, we used a framework by Scheirer and Dearing (Am J Publ Health 101:2059-2067, 2011) to evaluate multiple dimensions of sustainability from Project HEAL. METHODS: We examined the following dimensions of sustainability: (a) continued benefits for intervention recipients, (b) continuation of intervention activities, c) maintaining community partnerships, (d) changes in organizational policies or structures, (e) sustained attention to the underlying issues, (f) diffusion to additional sites, or even (g) unplanned consequences of the intervention. Project HEAL provided a three-workshop cancer educational series delivered by trained lay peer community health advisors (CHAs) in their churches. Multiple sources of sustainability were collected at 12 and 24 months after the intervention that reflect several levels of analysis: participant surveys; interviews with CHAs; records from the project's management database; and open-ended comments from CHAs, staff, and community partners. RESULTS: Outcomes differ for each dimension of sustainability. For continued benefit, 39 and 37% of the initial 375 church members attended the 12- and 24-month follow-up workshops, respectively. Most participants reported sharing the information from Project HEAL with family or friends (92% at 12 months; 87% at 24 months). For continuation of intervention activities, some CHAs reported that the churches held at least one additional cancer educational workshop (33% at 12 months; 24% at 24 months), but many more CHAs reported subsequent health activities in their churches (71% at 12 months; 52% at 24 months). No church replicated the original series of three workshops. Additional data confirm the maintenance of community partnerships, some changes in church health policies, and continued attention to health issues by churches and CHAs. CONCLUSIONS: The multiple dimensions of sustainability require different data sources and levels of analysis and show varied sustainability outcomes in this project. The findings reinforce the dynamic nature of evidence-based health interventions in community contexts.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13012-017-0576-x

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Scheirer, M. A., Santos, S. L. Z., Tagai, E. K., Bowie, J., Slade, J., Carter, R., & Holt, C. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Maryland, College Park (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Community Ministry of Prince George’s County (US)
Corresponding author
Holt, Cheryl L.
Venue
Implementation Science
Published
2017-03-28
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
43-43
ISSN
1748-5908 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2600463203
Cited by
29
References
36
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3
FWCI
3.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Implementation Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • University Libraries (University of Maryland) (submittedVersion)
  • Digital Repository at the University of Maryland (University of Maryland College Park)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (R01CA147313)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Community Health and Development
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › School Health and Nursing Education
Keywords
intervention sustainability, early cancer detection, African American churches, health communication, community health advisors, church-based health promotion, community partnerships
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Black or African American, Community Health Workers, Female, Health Promotion, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Religion, Teaching, Early Detection of Cancer, Health Communication

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review