A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Process evaluation of a worksite social and physical environmental intervention. | LitMetric

Process evaluation of a worksite social and physical environmental intervention.

J Occup Environ Med

From the Department of Public and Occupational Health (Ms Coffeng and van Mechelen, and Dr Boot), EMGO+ Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center (VUmc), Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Body@Work TNO-VUmc (Ms Coffeng and van Mechelen, and Drs Hendriksen and Boot), Research Center Physical Activity, Work and Health, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; and TNO (Expert Center Life Style) (Dr Hendriksen), Leiden, the Netherlands.

Published: December 2013

Objective: To evaluate the process of implementation of a social and physical environmental intervention and to explore differences regarding this process between both interventions.

Methods: Context, recruitment, dose delivered, fidelity, reach, dose received, satisfaction, and implementation barriers were investigated.

Results: Reach for the social and physical environmental interventions ranged from 45% to 76%. Mean satisfaction for the social environmental intervention was 6.0 and for the physical environmental intervention was 7.0. Generally, the results were higher for team leaders than for employees. Furthermore, the implementation of the physical intervention was better at the departments that additionally received the social intervention.

Conclusion: Both interventions were better implemented on the level of the team leader than that of the employees. Furthermore, the combined interventions received higher evaluation scores. To increase satisfaction and participation, attention should be paid to both employees and team leaders during implementation.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0b013e3182a50053DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

physical environmental
16
environmental intervention
16
social physical
12
team leaders
8
social
5
physical
5
environmental
5
intervention
5
process evaluation
4
evaluation worksite
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!