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.