An interventional study of Primary Cancer Prevention Implementation Toolkit (PCP-IT) in Focus of Study: Tailored Implementation, sponsored by Hidde van der Ploeg. Enrolling by invitation at 11 sites in 9 countries. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-04-09.
Sponsored by Hidde van der Ploeg · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other
The PIECES project aims to evaluate the Primary Cancer Prevention Implementation Toolkit (PCP-IT), an online implementation support toolkit that aids implementation teams in improving the implementation of primary cancer prevention programs (PCPs).
The primary aim of the PIECES study is to support and learn from the process of selecting, adapting, and implementing existing evidence-based programs to improve implementation outcomes and by that, improve the reach and effectiveness of primary cancer prevention programmes in real-world settings.
The study objectives are:
The PCP-IT will be used by various implementation settings across 9 countries (8 European countries and Australia). A multi-site case comparison design is used to generate in-depth knowledge about the performance and working mechanisms of the PCP-IT. Similarities, differences, and patterns across the different implementation sites will be investigated using a Realist Evaluation approach.
A range of modifiable factors are associated with cancer incidence among the population of the European Union (EU) and beyond. These include: 1) tobacco smoking and exposure to second-hand smoke, 2) alcohol consumption, 3) poor physical activity, 4) HPV infection, 5) sun exposure, and 6) poor diet. Various Primary Cancer Prevention (PCP) programs are currently available to address these risk factors with proven effectiveness. Decision-makers and implementers face the challenge of: 1) selecting appropriate and suitable programs, 2) tailoring the programs to the local context and consulting stakeholders, and 3) developing a tailored plan (i.e., strategies) for effectively implementing the selected and adapted PCP program. The lack of guidance and support for this complex and time-consuming process leads to two undesired outcomes: 1) the selection of ineffective or poorly adapted PCP programs, and 2) the application of ineffective implementation strategies that do not target local and context-dependent barriers to implementation. These scenarios are likely to reduce the effectiveness of primary cancer prevention programs in real-world settings, leading to inefficiencies and failing to prevent new cancer cases.
The PIECES project involves the development and evaluation of an online implementation support toolkit (the Primary Cancer Prevention Implementation Toolkit (PCP-IT)). The PCP-IT aims to support implementation teams in improving the implementation of primary cancer prevention programs (PCPs). The PCP-IT builds upon the theory-base and the proven to be effective ItFits tool. The PCP-IT encompasses a total of six modules. The modules are designed to guide implementers through the process of selecting and adapting PCP programs, identifying and addressing barriers, and developing and applying tailored implementation strategies. The core resources contributing to the generative mechanisms of the toolkit include: 1) a repository of primary cancer prevention programs, 2) a repository of determinants of practice, 3) a repository of implementation strategies, 4) stakeholder consultation at all stages, 5) an online community of implementation practitioners, and 6) structured stepped process flows, instructions, examples and worksheets for working with the materials.
In the PIECES study, a multi-site case comparison design is chosen to generate in-depth knowledge about the performance and working mechanisms of the PCP-IT. Similarities, differences, and patterns across the cases (i.e. different implementation settings) will be investigated using a Realist Evaluation approach. A pre/post-test measure will be applied to descriptively assess implementation outcomes. A time horizon of two years is selected to assess change over time.
The PCP-IT will be used in various countries and implementation settings, aiming for a rich representation of healthcare systems (Spain, the Netherlands, Albania, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Italy, Ukraine, Germany (3 settings), and Australia).
Within each implementation site, different types of participants with specific roles can be distinguished:
The PCP-IT will be evaluated through various levels of evalution, with a primary focus on evaluating the use of the PCP-IT and implementation outcomes of the PCP programs.
The primary focus of the evaluation study will be on evaluating the use of the PCP-IT (level 1) and the implementation outcomes of the PCP program (level 2). Level 3 evaluation, which involves evaluating the impact of the implemented PCP programs on targeted behavior changes, is not part of the central evaluation study. However, implementation sites are encouraged to conduct level 3 evaluations if resources such as time and funding permit. While level 3 evaluation is not critically necessary from a research perspective-since PCP programs included in the PCP-IT repository have already demonstrated effectiveness-it is important from a monitoring perspective. Conducting level 3 evaluations can for example help implementation sites to:
For this third level of evaluation, the specific details and ethical approvals are managed by each local implementation site. However, recommendations grounded in previous research are provided to guide the process and help maintain consistency across sites.
This is the only study on the registry with Hidde van der Ploeg as lead sponsor.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
The local implementation teams for this study, referred to as the implementers of the Primary Cancer Prevention Implementation Toolkit (PCP-IT), are the primary users of the toolkit and play a central role in tailoring and implementing cancer prevention interventions. Each team is responsible for selecting and adapting the intervention to meet local needs and developing a tailored implementation plan. Each team is led by an implementation lead, who directly oversees the implementation process and ensures the team effectively uses the PCP-IT to guide their work. In some cases, the implementation lead may also serve as the implementation coordinator. The coordinator's role is to provide higher-level oversight and may involve coordinating multiple implementation teams across various locations, such as hospitals, or focusing on a single team at one site.
Other: Primary Cancer Prevention Implementation Toolkit (PCP-IT)
The PCP-IT is an online implementation support toolkit which aims to support implementation teams in improving the implementation of primary cancer prevention programs (PCPs). The PCP-IT builds upon the theory-base and the proven to be effective ItFits tool. The PCP-IT encompasses a total of six modules which are designed to guide implementers through the process of selecting and adapting PCP programs, identifying and addressing barriers, and developing and applying tailored implementation strategies. The toolkit includes: (1) a repository of PCP programs, (2) a repository of determinants of practice, (3) a repository of implementation strategies, (4) stakeholder consultation at all stages, (5) an online community of implementation practitioners, and (6) structured stepped process flows, instructions, examples and worksheets for working with the materials. https://global.itfits-toolkit.com/
Competencies in Implementation
Participants are asked to rate how skilled they feel in various implementation competencies. Respondents evaluate their skills for each item on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from not at all to extremely (not at all, slightly, moderately, very, extremely).
Time frame: Month 0, repeated every six months until month 24.
Organizational Readiness for Implementing Change (ORIC)
Participants are asked to indicate how they perceive the readiness of their organization to implement a cancer prevention program. This is assessed using the Organizational Readiness for Implementing Change (ORIC) instrument, which includes 12 items about an organizational readiness to implement a cancer prevention program. Respondents rate their level of agreement with each item on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from I disagree to I agree (I disagree, I somewhat, disagree, Neither agree nor disagree, I somewhat agree, I agree).
Time frame: Month 0, repeated every six months until month 24.
Perceived Ease of Use
Participants are asked to indicate their agreement with 4 items about how useful they perceive the toolkit to be in their job. This is assessed using the Perceived Ease of Use instrument. Respondents rate their level of agreement with each item on a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from I strongly disagree to I strongly agree (I strongly disagree, I disagree I somewhat, disagree, Neither agree nor disagree, I somewhat agree, I agree, I strongly agree).
Time frame: Month 6, repeated every six months until month 24.
Perceived Usefulness
Participants are asked to indicate their agreement with 4 items about how easy they think it is to work with the toolkit. This is assessed using the Perceived Usefulness instrument. Respondents rate their level of agreement with each item on a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from I strongly disagree to I strongly agree (I strongly disagree, I disagree I somewhat, disagree, Neither agree nor disagree, I somewhat agree, I agree, I strongly agree).
Time frame: Month 6, repeated every six months until month 24.
Satisfaction with the PCP-IT
Participants are asked to rate their satisfaction with the toolkit using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Respondents provide a score reflecting their satisfaction with specific modules or components of the toolkit. The VAS ranges from 0 to 10, where 0 represents no satisfaction, 5 represents neutral, and 10 represents extreme satisfaction.
Time frame: Month 6, repeated every six months until month 24.
Perceived impact of the PCP-IT
Participants are asked to rate the extent to which they think the toolkit has contributed to various implementation steps using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The VAS ranges from 0 to 10, where 0 represents non-existent, 5 represents somewhat, and 10 represents very much.
Time frame: Month 6, repeated every six months until month 24.
Behavioral Intention
Participants are asked to indicate their agreement with 4 items about their intention or likelihood of using the toolkit in the future. This is assessed using the Behavioral Intention instrument. Respondents rate their level of agreement with each item on a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from I strongly disagree to I strongly agree (I strongly disagree, I disagree I somewhat, disagree, Neither agree nor disagree, I somewhat agree, I agree, I strongly agree).
Time frame: Month 6, repeated every six months until month 24.
Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.
No contact was published for this record. The registry link below has the sponsor’s details.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.