Next Article in Journal
Does An Education Seminar Intervention Improve the Parents’ Knowledge on Vaccination? Evidence from Yiwu, East China
Previous Article in Journal
Nicotine Levels and Presence of Selected Tobacco-Derived Toxins in Tobacco Flavoured Electronic Cigarette Refill Liquids
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessReview
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2015, 12(4), 3453-3468; doi:10.3390/ijerph120403453

A Systematic Review of Community Readiness Tool Applications: Implications for Reporting

1,†
,
1,2,3,†
,
4,†
,
1,†
and
1,†,*
1
School of Population Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia
2
Department of Medicine, St. Vincent's Hospital, The University of Melbourne, Fitzroy, VIC 3065, Australia
3
South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia
4
College of Natural Sciences, Tri-Ethnic Center, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editors: Stephen Thomas, Devon Payne-Sturges, Christiane Bunge and Kenneth Olden
Received: 19 December 2014 / Revised: 13 February 2015 / Accepted: 26 February 2015 / Published: 24 March 2015
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [923 KB, uploaded 24 March 2015]   |  

Abstract

Background: A systematic review characterised and synthesised applications of the Community Readiness Tool (CRT) and synthesised quantitative results for readiness applications at multiple time points. Methods: Eleven databases in OvidSP and EBSCHOhost were searched to retrieve CRT applications. Information from primary studies was extracted independently by two researchers. Results: Forty applications of the CRT met inclusion criteria focussing on 14 different health and social issues. The community of interest was most often defined solely on the basis of its geographical location (52.5%). Most studies used the CRT to plan (85%) and/or evaluate programs (40%). The CRT protocol was modified in 40% of studies. Six applications evaluated readiness at multiple time points, however limited reporting in primary studies precluded any synthesis of results. Applications identified methodological rigour, contextual information and community engagement as strengths, and time and resource costs as limitations. Conclusions: The CRT is well suited for planning and evaluating complex community health interventions given its flexibility to accommodate diverse definitions of community and issues. CRT applications would benefit from improved reporting; reporting recommendations for use of the CRT are outlined. View Full-Text
Keywords: community readiness; evaluation; community interventions; systematic review community readiness; evaluation; community interventions; systematic review
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Supplementary material

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Kostadinov, I.; Daniel, M.; Stanley, L.; Gancia, A.; Cargo, M. A Systematic Review of Community Readiness Tool Applications: Implications for Reporting. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2015, 12, 3453-3468.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health EISSN 1660-4601 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top