Along the way to developing a theory of the program: a re-examination of the conceptual framework as an organizing strategy.

PURPOSE Conceptual frameworks (CF) have historically been used to develop program theory. We re-examine the literature about the role of CF in this context, specifically how they can be used to create descriptive and prescriptive theories, as building blocks for a program theory. Using a case example of colorectal cancer screening intervention development, we describe the process of developing our initial CF, the methods used to explore the constructs in the framework and revise the framework for intervention development. METHODS We present seven steps that guided the development of our CF: (1) assemble the "right" research team, (2) incorporate existing literature into the emerging CF, (3) construct the conceptual framework, (4) diagram the framework, (5) operationalize the framework: develop the research design and measures, (6) conduct the research, and (7) revise the framework. RESULTS A revised conceptual framework depicted more complicated inter-relationships of the different predisposing, enabling, reinforcing, and system-based factors. The updated framework led us to generate program theory and serves as the basis for designing future intervention studies and outcome evaluations. CONCLUSIONS A CF can build a foundation for program theory. We provide a set of concrete steps and lessons learned to assist practitioners in developing a CF.

[1]  Deborah Helitzer,et al.  Evaluation for community-based programs: the integration of logic models and factor analysis. , 2010, Evaluation and program planning.

[2]  S. Ennett,et al.  Conceptual models for health education research and practice. , 1991, Health education research.

[3]  C. Klabunde,et al.  Colorectal cancer screening barriers and facilitators in older persons. , 2010, Preventive medicine.

[4]  Christina M Getrich,et al.  Expressions of Machismo in Colorectal Cancer Screening Among New Mexico Hispanic Subpopulations , 2012, Qualitative health research.

[5]  R. Croyle,et al.  Theory at a glance: a guide for health promotion practice (Second edition). , 2005 .

[6]  S. Cudney,et al.  Evolution of a conceptual model for adaptation to chronic illness. , 2008, Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing.

[7]  W. Shadish,et al.  Foundations of Program Evaluation: Theories of Practice , 1990 .

[8]  G. Anandarajah The 3 H and BMSEST Models for Spirituality in Multicultural Whole-Person Medicine , 2008, The Annals of Family Medicine.

[9]  Kara L Hall,et al.  Moving the science of team science forward: collaboration and creativity. , 2008, American journal of preventive medicine.

[10]  Deborah Helitzer,et al.  Development of a Planning and Evaluation Methodology for Assessing the Contribution of Theory to a Diabetes Prevention Lifestyle Intervention , 2008, Health promotion practice.

[11]  David K. Espey,et al.  Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality Disparities in New Mexico , 2014, Journal of cancer epidemiology.

[12]  A. Jemal,et al.  Cancer statistics, 2013 , 2013, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[13]  J. Derevensky,et al.  The Prevention of Gambling Problems in Youth: A Conceptual Framework , 2004, Journal of Gambling Studies.

[14]  A. O'Connor Validation of a Decisional Conflict Scale , 1995, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[15]  Huey-tsyh Chen Theory-driven evaluations , 1990 .

[16]  E. Boyko,et al.  Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy. , 2004, Family medicine.

[17]  C. Weiss How Can Theory-Based Evaluation Make Greater Headway? , 1997 .

[18]  C. Jackson Behavioral science theory and principles for practice in health education , 1997 .

[19]  N. Powe,et al.  Designing and evaluating interventions to eliminate racial and ethnic disparities in health care , 2002, Journal of general internal medicine.

[20]  David M. Fetterman,et al.  Foundations of empowerment evaluation , 2000 .

[21]  A. Wandersman Four Keys to Success (Theory, Implementation, Evaluation, and Resource/System Support): High Hopes and Challenges in Participation , 2009, American journal of community psychology.

[22]  Dawn K Wilson,et al.  Updating the FORECAST formative evaluation approach and some implications for ameliorating theory failure, implementation failure, and evaluation failure. , 2013, Evaluation and program planning.

[23]  C. Klabunde,et al.  Vital Signs: Colorectal Cancer Screening Test Use — United States, 2012 , 2013, MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report.

[24]  K. Glanz,et al.  An Ecological Perspective on Health Promotion Programs , 1988, Health education quarterly.

[25]  Donald Steinwachs,et al.  National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference Statement: Enhancing Use and Quality of Colorectal Cancer Screening , 2010, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[26]  A. Jemal,et al.  Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975‐2006, featuring colorectal cancer trends and impact of interventions (risk factors, screening, and treatment) to reduce future rates , 2010, Cancer.

[27]  Blake Poland,et al.  Settings for Health Promotion: An Analytic Framework to Guide Intervention Design and Implementation , 2009, Health promotion practice.

[28]  L. Solberg Improving Medical Practice: A Conceptual Framework , 2007, The Annals of Family Medicine.