***TASK***
the task is to simplify the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***INPUT***
the input is the abstract of a biomedical literature

***OUTPUT***
the output is the simplified abstract for the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***DOCUMENTATION***

***EXAMPLES***

Input: We included 27 trials, 18 of which were conducted in the USA. Nineteen studies employed randomised controlled trial (RCT) designs. Fifteen trials tested strategies to implement healthy eating policies, practice or programs; six trials tested strategies targeting physical activity policies or practices; and three trials targeted tobacco policies or practices. Three trials targeted a combination of risk factors. None of the included trials sought to increase the implementation of interventions to delay initiation or reduce the consumption of alcohol. All trials examined multi-strategic implementation strategies and no two trials examined the same combinations of implementation strategies. The most common implementation strategies included educational materials, educational outreach and educational meetings. For all outcomes, the overall quality of evidence was very low and the risk of bias was high for the majority of trials for detection and performance bias. Among 13 trials reporting dichotomous implementation outcomes—the proportion of schools or school staff (e.g. classes) implementing a targeted policy or practice—the median unadjusted (improvement) effect sizes ranged from 8.5% to 66.6%. Of seven trials reporting the percentage of a practice, program or policy that had been implemented, the median unadjusted effect (improvement), relative to the control ranged from -8% to 43%. The effect, relative to control, reported in two trials assessing the impact of implementation strategies on the time per week teachers spent delivering targeted policies or practices ranged from 26.6 to 54.9 minutes per week. Among trials reporting other continuous implementation outcomes, findings were mixed. Four trials were conducted of strategies that sought to achieve implementation 'at scale', that is, across samples of at least 50 schools, of which improvements in implementation were reported in three trials. The impact of interventions on student health behaviour or weight status were mixed. Three of the eight trials with physical activity outcomes reported no significant improvements. Two trials reported reductions in tobacco use among intervention relative to control. Seven of nine trials reported no between-group differences on student overweight, obesity or adiposity. Positive improvements in child dietary intake were generally reported among trials reporting these outcomes. Three trials assessed the impact of implementation strategies on the attitudes of school staff and found mixed effects. Two trials specified in the study methods an assessment of potential unintended adverse effects, of which, they reported none. One trial reported implementation support did not significantly increase school revenue or expenses and another, conducted a formal economic evaluation, reporting the intervention to be cost-effective. Trial heterogeneity, and the lack of consistent terminology describing implementation strategies, were important limitations of the review. Given the very low quality of the available evidence, it is uncertain whether the strategies tested improve implementation of the targeted school-based policies or practices, student health behaviours, or the knowledge or attitudes of school staff. It is also uncertain if strategies to improve implementation are cost-effective or if they result in unintended adverse consequences. Further research is required to guide efforts to facilitate the translation of evidence into practice in this setting.
Output:

Study characteristics: We included 27 trials, 18 of which were conducted in the USA. Fifeteen trials tested strategies to implement healthy eating policies, practice or programs; six trials tested strategies targeting physical activity policies or practices; and three trials targeted tobacco policies or practices. Three trials targeted a combination of health behaviours. None of the included trials sought to increase the implementation of interventions to delay initiation or reduce the consumption of alcohol. The trials tested a range of implementation support strategies, including educational materials, educational meetings, the use of opinion leaders, external funding, local consensus processes, and tailored interventions. Search date: The evidence is current to 31 August 2016. Key results: It is uncertain whether the strategies tested improve implementation of the targeted school-based policies or practices, student health behaviours, or the knowledge or attitudes of school staff. It is also uncertain whether the strategies tested result in unintended adverse effects or whether they are cost-effective. Limitations: Trial heterogeneity, and the lack of consistent terminology describing implementation strategies were important limitations of the review. Quality of evidence: We rated the overall quality of evidence as very low for all outcomes that included trial-reported effects.