How Has Intervention Fidelity Been Assessed in Smoking Cessation Interventions? A Systematic Review
Table 3
Reporting of fidelity components within each dimension, in rank order.
Fidelity dimension
Average fidelity score (%) (range)
Total number of components in NIH BCC fidelity framework
Most reported component ( studies, % of total review sample)
Least reported component ( studies, % of total review sample)
Enactment
92.7% (0–100%)
2
Participant performance of the intervention skills will be assessed in settings in which the intervention might be applied (, 96%)
A strategy will be used to assess performance of the intervention skills in settings in which the intervention might be applied) (, 93%)
Design
56.1% (5–95%)
7
Information about the treatment dose in the intervention condition (, 93%)
Plans to address possible setbacks in implementation (i.e., backup systems or providers) (, 24%)
Receipt
48% (0–100%)
5
The participants’ ability to perform the intervention skills being assessed during the intervention period (, 91%)
Multicultural factors considered in the development and delivery of the intervention (e.g., provided in native language; protocol is consistent with the values of the target group) (, 13%)
Delivery
44.5% (0–77%)
9
The method to ensure that the content of the intervention is delivered as specified (, 85%)
Whether there was a plan for the assessment of whether or not proscribed components were delivered (e.g., components that are unnecessary or unhelpful) (, 2%)
Training
37.1% (0–100%)
7
Description of how providers will be trained (, 76%)
Presence of a training plan that takes into account trainees’ different education and experience and learning styles (, 2%)
Average fidelity score refers to the presence of framework components.