Fiona Stacey

Dr. Fiona Stacey

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

13Years (2014-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
7 January 2021 in Implementation Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PRPenny Reeves
Penny Reeves
KEKim Edmunds
Kim Edmunds
ZSZoe Szewczyk
Zoe Szewczyk
AGAlice Grady
Alice Grady
Serene YoongSerene Yoong
Serene Yoong
ASAndrew Searles
Andrew Searles
Background: Despite the known benefits of healthy eating in childhood, few Australian childcare services provide food that is consistent with dietary guidelines. The effectiveness of a web-based menu planning intervention to increase childcare service provision of healthy foods and decrease provision of discretionary foods in long day-care services in Australia was assessed in a randomised controlled trial. Here we consider the costs, consequences, cost-effectiveness and budget impact of the intervention using data collected within the trial. Methods: The prospective trial-based economic evaluation involved 54 childcare services across New South Wales (NSW), Australia. Services were randomised to a 12-month intervention or usual care. The intervention involved access to a web-based menu planning and decision support tool and online resources. Effectiveness measures included mean number of food groups, overall menu and individual food group compliance with dietary guidelines, and mean servings of food groups at 12 months. Costs (reported in $AUD, 2017/18) were evaluated from both health sector and societal perspectives. The direct cost to support uptake of the intervention was calculated, as were costs to each childcare service. The incremental cost of the intervention was calculated as the net difference in the cost to undertake menu planning and review plus the direct cost of the intervention. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) including uncertainty intervals were estimated for differences in costs and effects between intervention and control groups. A relative value index was calculated to determine overall value for money. Results: Over the 12 months of the trial, we calculated a difference in cost between usual practice and intervention groups of − $482 (95% UI − $859, − $56). While the measured increase in menu and food group compliance within the trial did not reach statistical significance, there were significant improvements in mean servings of fruit and discretionary food, represented in the cost-consequence analysis. The calculated relative value index of 1.1 suggests that the intervention returns acceptable value for money for the outcomes generated. Conclusion: Compared to usual practice, web-based programmes may offer an efficient and sustainable alternative for childcare services to improve the provision of healthy foods to children in their care. Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12616000974404

1 July 2020 in Implementation Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Serene YoongSerene Yoong
Serene Yoong
HAHall Alix
Hall Alix
FSFiona Stacey
Fiona Stacey
AGAlice Grady
Alice Grady
RSRachel Sutherland
Rachel Sutherland
LWLuke Wolfenden
Luke Wolfenden
Background: Nudge interventions are those that seek to modify the social and physical environment to enhance capacity for subconscious behaviours that align with the intrinsic values of an individual, without actively restricting options. This study sought to describe the application and effects of nudge strategies on clinician implementation of health-related guidelines, policies and practices within studies included in relevant Cochrane systematic reviews. Methods: As there is varied terminology used to describe nudge, this study examined studies within relevant systematic reviews. A two-stage screening process was undertaken where, firstly, all systematic reviews published in the Cochrane Library between 2016 and 2018 were screened to identify reviews that included quantitative studies to improve implementation of guidelines among healthcare providers. Secondly, individual studies within relevant systematic reviews were included if they were (i) randomised controlled trials (RCTs), (ii) included a nudge strategy in at least one intervention arm, and (iii) explicitly aimed to improve clinician implementation behaviour. We categorised nudge strategies into priming, salience and affect, default, incentives, commitment and ego, and norms and messenger based on the Mindspace framework. Synthesis: The number and percentage of trials using each nudge strategy was calculated. Due to substantial heterogeneity, we did not undertake a meta-analysis. Instead, we calculated within-study point estimates and 95% confidence intervals, and used a vote-counting approach to explore effects. Results: Seven reviews including 42 trials reporting on 57 outcomes were included. The most common nudge strategy was priming (69%), then norms and messenger (40%). Of the 57 outcomes, 86% had an effect on clinician behaviour in the hypothesised direction, and 53% of those were statistically significant. For continuous outcomes, the median effect size was 0.39 (0.22, 0.45), while for dichotomous outcomes the median Odds Ratio was 1.62 (1.13, 2.76). Conclusions: This review of 42 RCTs included in Cochrane systematic reviews found that the impact of nudge strategies on clinician behaviour was at least comparable to other interventions targeting implementation of evidence-based guidelines. While uncertainty remains, the review provides justification for ongoing investigation of the evaluation and application of nudge interventions to support provider behaviour change. Trial registration: This review was not prospectively registered.

17 November 2021 in Nutrients
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
KOKate Maree O'Brien
Kate Maree O'Brien
CBCourtney Barnes
Courtney Barnes
Serene YoongSerene Yoong
Serene Yoong
ECElizabeth Campbell
Elizabeth Campbell
RWRebecca Wyse
Rebecca Wyse
RHRebecca K. Hodder
Rebecca K. Hodder
Schools are identified as a key setting to influence children’s and adolescents’ healthy eating. This umbrella review synthesised evidence from systematic reviews of school-based nutrition interventions designed to improve dietary intake outcomes in children aged 6 to 18 years. We undertook a systematic search of six electronic databases and grey literature to identify relevant reviews of randomized controlled trials. The review findings were categorised for synthesis by intervention type according to the World Health Organisation Health Promoting Schools (HPS) framework domains: nutrition education; food environment; all three HPS framework domains; or other (not aligned to HPS framework domain). Thirteen systematic reviews were included. Overall, the findings suggest that school-based nutrition interventions, including nutrition education, food environment, those based on all three domains of the HPS framework, and eHealth interventions, can have a positive effect on some dietary outcomes, including fruit, fruit and vegetables combined, and fat intake. These results should be interpreted with caution, however, as the quality of the reviews was poor. Though these results support continued public health investment in school-based nutrition interventions to improve child dietary intake, the limitations of this umbrella review also highlight the need for a comprehensive and high quality systematic review of primary studies.

30 June 2021 in Nutrients
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RWRebecca Wyse
Rebecca Wyse
JJJacklyn Jackson
Jacklyn Jackson
TDTessa Delaney
Tessa Delaney
AGAlice Grady
Alice Grady
FSFiona Stacey
Fiona Stacey
Serene YoongSerene Yoong
Serene Yoong
Digital food environments are now commonplace across many food service and retail settings, influencing how the population orders and accesses foods. As such, digital food environments represent a novel platform to deliver strategies to improve public health nutrition. The purpose of this review was to explore the impact of dietary interventions embedded within online food ordering systems, on user selection and purchase of healthier foods and beverages. A systematic search of eight electronic databases and grey literature sources was conducted up to October 2020. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials and controlled trials, designed to encourage the selection and purchase of healthier products and/or discourage the selection and purchase of less-healthy products using strategies delivered via real-world online food ordering systems. A total of 9441 articles underwent title and abstract screening, 140 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 11 articles were included in the review. Meta-analysis of seven studies indicated that interventions delivered via online food ordering systems are effective in reducing the energy content of online food purchases (standardized mean difference (SMD): −0.34, p = 0.01). Meta-analyses including three studies each suggest that these interventions may also be effective in reducing the fat (SMD: −0.83, p = 0.04), saturated fat (SMD: −0.7, p = 0.008) and sodium content (SMD: −0.43, p = 0.01) of online food purchases. Given the ongoing growth in the use of online food ordering systems, future research to determine how we can best utilize these systems to support public health nutrition is warranted.

4 February 2020 in Journal of Medical Internet Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
AGAlice Grady
Alice Grady
LWLuke Wolfenden
Luke Wolfenden
JWJohn Wiggers
John Wiggers
CRChris Rissel
Chris Rissel
MFMeghan Finch
Meghan Finch
Serene YoongSerene Yoong
Serene Yoong
Background: Foods provided in childcare services are not consistent with dietary guideline recommendations. Web-based systems offer unique opportunities to support the implementation of such guidelines. Objective: This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of a Web-based menu planning intervention in increasing the mean number of food groups on childcare service menus that comply with dietary guidelines. Secondary aims were to assess the impact of the intervention on the proportion of service menus compliant with recommendations for (1) all food groups; (2) individual food groups; and (3) mean servings of individual food groups. Childcare service use and acceptability of the Web-based program were also assessed. Methods: A single-blind, parallel-group randomized controlled trial was undertaken with 54 childcare services in New South Wales, Australia. Services were randomized to a 12-month intervention or usual care control. Intervention services received access to a Web-based menu planning program linked to their usual childcare management software system. Childcare service compliance with dietary guidelines and servings of food groups were assessed at baseline, 3-month follow-up, and 12-month follow-up. Results: No significant differences in the mean number of food groups compliant with dietary guidelines and the proportion of service menus compliant with recommendations for all food groups, or for individual food groups, were found at 3- or 12-month follow-up between the intervention and control groups. Intervention service menus provided significantly more servings of fruit (P<.001), vegetables (P=.03), dairy (P=.03), and meat (P=.003), and reduced their servings of discretionary foods (P=.02) compared with control group at 3 months. This difference was maintained for fruit (P=.03) and discretionary foods (P=.003) at 12 months. Intervention childcare service staff logged into the Web-based program an average of 40.4 (SD 31.8) times and rated the program as highly acceptable. Conclusions: Although improvements in childcare service overall menu and individual food group compliance with dietary guidelines were not statistically significant, findings indicate that a Web-based menu planning intervention can improve the servings for some healthy food groups and reduce the provision of discretionary foods. Future research exploring the effectiveness of differing strategies in improving the implementation of dietary guidelines in childcare services is warranted. Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ANZCTR): 16000974404; http://www.anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12616000974404.aspx

26 May 2022 in Journal of Medical Internet Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
MHMegan Hammersley
Megan Hammersley
RWRebecca Wyse
Rebecca Wyse
RJRachel Jones
Rachel Jones
Anthony (Tony) OkelyAnthony (Tony) Okely
Anthony (Tony) Okely
LWLuke Wolfenden
Luke Wolfenden
CRChris Rissel
Chris Rissel
Background: Few translational trials have provided detailed reports of process evaluation results. Objective: This study reported on findings from a mixed methods process evaluation of a large translational trial comparing 2 remotely delivered healthy eating and active living interventions with an active control, targeting parents of young children. Methods: Mixed methods process evaluation data were collected as part of a 3-arm, partially randomized preference trial targeting parents of children aged 2 to 6 years from New South Wales, Australia. Recruitment strategies were assessed through the participant baseline questionnaire and a questionnaire completed by the health promotion staff involved in recruitment. Data on participants’ intervention preferences were collected at baseline and after the intervention. Intervention acceptability and demographic data were collected via a postintervention questionnaire (approximately 3 months after baseline), which was supplemented by qualitative participant interviews. Implementation data on intervention fidelity and withdrawal were also recorded. Differences in intervention acceptability, fidelity, and withdrawal rates between telephone and web-based interventions and between randomized and nonrandomized participants were analyzed. The significance level was set at P<.05 for all tests. The interview content was analyzed, key themes were drawn from participant responses, and findings were described narratively. Results: Data were collected from 458 participants in the baseline survey and 144 (31.4%) participants in the 3-month postintervention survey. A total of 30 participants completed the qualitative interviews. A total of 6 health promotion staff members participated in the survey on recruitment strategies. Most participants were recruited from Early Childhood Education and Care services. There was a broad reach of the study; however, better take-up rates were observed in regional and rural areas compared with metropolitan areas. Parents with a university education were overrepresented. Most participants preferred the web-based medium of delivery at baseline. There was high acceptability of the web-based and telephone interventions. Participants found the healthy eating content to be the most useful component of the modules (web-based) and calls (telephone). They regarded text (web-based) or verbal (telephone) information as the most useful component. A high proportion of participants completed the telephone intervention compared with the web-based intervention; however, more participants actively withdrew from the telephone intervention. Conclusions: This is one of the first studies to comprehensively report on process evaluation data from a translation trial, which demonstrated high acceptability of all interventions but a strong participant preference for the web-based intervention. This detailed process evaluation is critical to inform further implementation and be considered alongside the effectiveness outcomes.