WHO. Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion. Geneva: WHO; 1986.
Google Scholar
World Health Organization. Promoting health through schools: report of a WHO expert committee on comprehensive school health and education. Geneva: World Health Organisation; 1997.
Google Scholar
Bonell C, Humphrey N, Fletcher A, Moore L, Anderson R, Campbell R. Why schools should promote students’ health and wellbeing. BMJ. 2014;348:g3078. doi:10.1136/bmj.g3078.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Deschesnes M, Martin C, Hill AJ. Comprehensive approaches to school health promotion: how to achieve broader implementation. Health Promot Int. 2003;18(4):387–96.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Samdal O, Rowling L. Theoretical and empirical base for implementation components of health-promoting schools. Health Educ. 2011;111(5):367–90.
Article
Google Scholar
Parsons C, Stears D, Thomas C. The health promoting school in Europe: conceptualising and evaluating the change. Health Educ J. 1996;55(3):311–21.
Article
Google Scholar
St Leger LH. The opportunities and effectiveness of the health promoting primary school in improving child health - a review of the claims and evidence. Health Educ Res. 1999;14(1):51–69.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Keshavarz N, Nutbeam D, Rowling L, Khavarpour F. Schools as social complex adaptive systems: a new way to understand the challenges of introducing the health promoting schools concept. Soc Sci Med. 2010;70:1467–74.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Langford R, Bonell CP, Jones HE, Pouliou T, Murphy SM, Waters E et al. The WHO Health Promoting School framework for improving the health and well-being of students and their academic achievement (Review). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014;2014(4 Art. No. CD008958). doi:10.1002/14651858.CD008958.pub2.
Bonell C, Wells H, Harden A, Jamal F, Fletcher A, Thomas J, et al. The effect on student health of interventions modifying the school environment: systematic review. J Epidemiol Community. 2013;67:677–81.
Article
CAS
Google Scholar
Jamal F, Fletcher A, Harden A, Wells H, Thomas J, Bonell C. The school environment and student health: a systematic review and meta-ethnography of qualitative research. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:798.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Gugglberger L, Inchley J. Phases of health promotion implementation into the Scottish school system. Health Promot Int. 2012;29(2):256–66.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Hall WJ, Zeveloff A, Steckler A, Schneider M, Thompson D, Pham T, et al. Process evaluation results from the HEALTHY physical education intervention. Health Educ Res. 2012;27(2):307–18.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Bartholomew L, Parcel G, Kok G, Gottlieb N, Fernandez M. Planning health promotion programs: an intervention mapping approach. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2011.
Google Scholar
Dusenbury L, Brannigan R, Falco M, Hansen WB. A review of research on fidelity of implementation: implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings. Health Educ Res. 2003;18(2):237–56.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Ozer EJ. Contextual effects in school-based violence prevention programs: a conceptual framework and empirical review. J Prim Prev. 2006;27(3):315–40.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Anderson R. New MRC guidance on evaluating complex intervention: clarifying what interventions work by researching how and why they are effective. Br Med J. 2008;337:a1937.
Article
Google Scholar
Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: a realist perspective. London: Sage Publications; 2006.
Book
Google Scholar
Pawson R, Greenhalgh T, Harvey G, Walshe K. Realist review: a new method of systematic review for complex policy interventions. J Health Serv Res Pol. 2005;10(S1):21–34.
Article
Google Scholar
Kellogg Foundation WK. Logic model development guide. Battle Creek: W.K. Kellogg Foundation; 2004.
Google Scholar
Moore G, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: UK Medical Research Council (MRC) guidance. London: MRC; 2014.
Google Scholar
Bhaskar R. A realist theory of science. London: Verso; 2008.
Google Scholar
Sayer A. Realism and social science. London: Sage; 2000.
Book
Google Scholar
Pawson R, Owen L, Wong G. The Today Programme’s contribution to evidence-based policy. Evaluation. 2010;16(2):211–3.
Article
Google Scholar
Berwick DM. The science of improvement. JAMA. 2008;299(10):1182–4.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Schulz R, Czaja SJ, McKay JR, Ory MG, Belle SH. Intervention Taxonomy (ITAX): describing essential features of interventions. Am J Health Behav. 2010;34(6):811–21.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Pearson M, Chilton R, Woods HB, Wyatt K, Ford T, Abraham C, et al. Implementing health promotion in schools: protocol for a realist systematic review of research and experience in the United Kingdom. Syst Rev. 2012;1:48.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Buckingham J, Pawson R. RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC Med. 2013;11:21.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Ritzer G. Meta-theorizing in Sociology. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books; 1991.
Google Scholar
Roen K, Arai L, Roberts H, Popay J. Extending systematic reviews to include evidence on implementation: methodological work on a review of community-based initiatives to prevent injuries. Soc Sci Med. 2006;63:1060–71.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Charmaz K. Constructing grounded theory. 2nd ed. London: Sage; 2014.
Google Scholar
Greenberg MT, Domitrovich CE, Gracyk PA, Zins JE. The study of implementation in school-based preventive interventions: theory, research and practice. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2005.
Google Scholar
Adelman HS, Taylor L. Toward a scale-up model for replicating new approaches to schooling. J Educ Psychol Consult. 1997;8(2):197–230.
Article
Google Scholar
Dusenbury L, Brannigan R, Hansen WB, Walsh J, Falco M. Quality of implementation: developing measures crucial to understanding the diffusion of preventive interventions. Health Educ J. 2005;20(3):308–13.
Google Scholar
Wallace A, Croucher K, Quilgars D, Baldwin S. Meeting the challenge: developing systematic reviewing in social policy. Policy and Politics. 2004;32(4):455–70.
Article
Google Scholar
Noblit GW, Hare RD. Meta-ethnography: synthesizing qualitative studies. London: Sage Publications; 1988.
Book
Google Scholar
Pawson R. Digging for nuggets: how ‘bad’ research can yield ‘good’ evidence (Realis Synthesis - Supplementary reading 6). 2006. http://www.leeds.ac.uk/realistsynthesis/supreadings.htm. Accessed 18 September 2015.
Pawson R. Does Megan’s Law work? A theory-driven systematic review (Realist Synthesis - Supplementary reading 7). 2006. http://www.leeds.ac.uk/realistsynthesis/supreadings.htm. Accessed 18 September 2015.
Lanham HJ, Leykum LK, Taylor BS, McCannon CJ, Lindberg C, Lester RT. How complexity science can inform scale-up and spread in health care: understanding the role of self-organization in variation across local contexts. Soc Sci Med. 2013;93:194–202.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
University of Bristol. DECIPHer-ASSIST: reducing teenage smoking though a cost-effective prevention programme (REF 2014 Impact case study). 2014. http://results.ref.ac.uk/Submissions/Impact/702. Accessed 18 September 2015.
Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implementation Science. 2009;4:50.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Lowden K, Quinn J, Kirk S. Evaluation of the Active Primary School Pilot Programme: research report no.90. Edinburgh: Sport Scotland; 2004.
Google Scholar
Sahota P, Rudolf MC, Dixey R, Hill AJ, Barth JH, Cade J, et al. Evaluation of implementation and effect of primary school based intervention to reduce risk factors for obesity. BMJ. 2001;323(7320):1027–9.
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Audrey S, Cordall K, Moore L, Cohen D, Campbell R. The development and implementation of a peer-led intervention to prevent smoking among secondary school students using their established social networks. Health Educ J. 2004;63(3):266–84.
Article
Google Scholar
Audrey S, Holliday J, Campbell R. Commitment and compatibility: teachers’ perspectives on the implementation of an effective school-based, peer-led smoking intervention. Health Educ J. 2008;67(2):74–90.
Article
Google Scholar
Audrey S, Holliday J, Campbell R. It’s good to talk: adolescent perspectives of an informal, peer-led intervention to reduce smoking. Soc Sci Med. 2006;63:320–34.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Holliday J, Audrey S, Moore L, Parry-Langdon N, Campbell R. High fidelity? How should we consider variations in the delivery of school-based health promotion interventions? Health Educ J. 2009;68(1):44–62.
Article
Google Scholar
Stead M, Stradling B, MacKintosh Anne M, MacNeil M, Minty S, Eadie D. Delivery of the Blueprint programme: report. Stirling: University of Stirling; 2007.
Google Scholar
Stead M, Stradling R, MacNeil M, MacKintosh AM, Minty S, Stead M, et al. Implementation evaluation of the Blueprint multi-component drug prevention programme: fidelity of school component delivery. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2007;26(6):653–64.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Blueprint Evaluation Team. Blueprint drugs education: the response of pupils and parents to the programme. London: Home Office; 2007.
Google Scholar
Frederick K, Barlow J. The Citizenship Safety Project: a pilot study. Health Educ Res. 2006;21(1):87–96.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Warren JM, Henry CJ, Lightowler HJ, Bradshaw SM, Perwaiz S, Warren JM, et al. Evaluation of a pilot school programme aimed at the prevention of obesity in children. Health Promot Int. 2003;18(4):287–96.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Newman R, Nutbeam D. Teachers’ views of the Family Smoking Education Project. Health Educ J. 1989;48(1):9–13.
Article
Google Scholar
Lowden K, Powney J. An evolving sexual health education programme: from health workers to teachers. Glasgow: The Scottish Council for Research in Education; 1996.
Google Scholar
Wyatt KM, Lloyd JJ, Creanor S, Logan S. The development, feasibility and acceptability of a school-based obesity prevention programme: results from three phases of piloting. BMJ Open. 2011;1:e000026.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Rothwell H, Segrott J. Preventing alcohol misuse in young people aged 9-11 years through promoting family communication: an exploratory evaluation of the Kids, Adults Together (KAT) Programme. BMC Public Health. 2011;11:810.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Stead M, MacKintosh AM, Eadie D, Hastings G. NE Choices: the results of a multi-component drug prevention programme for adolescents (DPAS paper no 14). London: Home Office; 2001.
Google Scholar
Teeman D, Reed F, Bielby G, Scott E, Sims D. Evaluation of the PhunkyFoods Programme. Final report. Slough: National Foundation for Educational Research; 2008.
Google Scholar
Christian MS, Evans CE, Ransley JK, Greenwood DC, Thomas JD, Cade JE. Process evaluation of a cluster randomised controlled trial of a school-based fruit and vegetable intervention: Project Tomato. Public Health Nutr. 2012;15(3):459–65.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Forrest S, Strange V, Ann O. A comparison of students’ evaluations of a peer-delivered sex education programme and teacher-led provision. Sex Educ. 2002;2(3):195–214.
Article
Google Scholar
Strange V, Forrest S, Oakley A. Peer-led sex education - characteristics of peer educators and their perceptions of the impact on them of participation in a peer education programme. Health Educ Res. 2002;17(3):327–37.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Strange V, Forrest S, Oakley A. What influences peer-led sex education in the classroom? A view from the peer educators. Health Educ Res. 2002;17(3):339–49.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Oakley A, Strange V, Stephenson J, Forrest S, Moneiro H. Evaluating processes: a case study of a randomized controlled trial of sex education. Evaluation. 2004;10(4):440–62.
Article
Google Scholar
Stephenson JM, Strange V, Forrest S, Oakley A, Copas A, Allen E, et al. Pupil-led sex education in England (RIPPLE study): cluster-randomised intervention trial. Lancet. 2004;364(9431):338–46.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Strange V, Allen E, Oakley A, Bonell C, Johnson A, Stephenson J. Integrating process with outcome data in a randomized controlled trial of sex education. Evaluation. 2006;12(3):330–52.
Article
Google Scholar
Stathi A, Nordin S, Riddoch C. Evaluation of the ‘Schools on the Move’ project. London: Middlesex University; 2006.
Google Scholar
Wight D, Buston K, Henderson M. The SHARE project: a rigorous evaluation of teacher-led sex education. Sex Education Matters. 1998;16:10–1.
Google Scholar
Wight D, Abraham C. From psycho-social theory to sustainable classroom practice: developing a research-based teacher-delivered sex education programme. Health Educ Res. 2000;15:25–38.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Buston K, Hart G. Heterosexism and homophobia in Scottish school sex education: exploring the nature of the problem. J Adolesc. 2001;24:95–109.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Buston K, Wight D, Scott S. Difficulty and diversity: the context and practice of sex education. Brit J Sociol Educ. 2001;22(3):353–268.
Article
Google Scholar
Buston K, Wight D, Hart G, Scott S, Buston K, Wight D, et al. Implementation of a teacher-delivered sex education programme: obstacles and facilitating factors. Health Educ Res. 2002;17(1):59–72.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Buston K, Wight D, Hart G. Inside the sex education classroom: the importance of class context in engaging pupils. Cult Health Sex. 2002;4(3):317–35.
Article
Google Scholar
Buston K, Wight D. The salience and utility of school sex education to young women. Sex Educ. 2002;2(3):233–50.
Article
Google Scholar
Wight D, Raab G, Henderson M, Abraham C, Buston K, Hart G, et al. The limits of teacher-delivered sex education: interim behavioural outcomes from a randomised trial. Br Med J. 2002;324:1430–3.
Article
Google Scholar
Wight D, Buston K. Meeting needs but not changing goals: evaluation of inservice teacher training for sex education. Oxford Rev Educ. 2003;29(4):521–43.
Article
Google Scholar
Buston K, Wight D. Pupils’ participation in sex education lessons: understanding variation across classes. Sex Educ. 2004;4(3):285–301.
Article
Google Scholar
Newman R, Smith C, Nutbeam D. Teachers’ views of the ‘Smoking And Me’ project. Health Educ J. 1991;50(3):107–10.
Article
Google Scholar
Crosswaite C, Tooby J, Cyster R. SPICED: evaluation of a drug education project in Kirklees primary schools… Schools Partnership in Children’s Education on Drugs. Health Educ J. 2004;63(1):61–9.
Article
Google Scholar
Challen A, Noden P, West A, Machin S. UK Resilience Programme evaluation: interim report (research report DCSF-RR094). London: Department for Children, Schools and Families; 2009.
Google Scholar
Challen A, Noden P, West A, Machin S. UK Resilience Programme: final report. London: Department for Education; 2011.
Google Scholar
Stathi A, Sebire SJ. A process evaluation of an outreach physical activity program in an inner-city primary school. J Phys Act Health. 2011;8 Suppl 2:S239–S48.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Audrey S, Holliday J, Parry Langdon N, Campbell R. Meeting the challenges of implementing process evaluation within randomized controlled trials: the example of ASSIST (A Stop Smoking in Schools Trial). Health Educ Res. 2006;21:366–77.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar