Next, policy makers expressed a preference for interventions with strong evidence on intervention effectiveness compared to weak evidence.
Instead, they expressed a preference for interventions which enabled them to feel in control of the behaviour.
Specifically, estimated regression coefficients on the AgeGrp dummies suggest a weaker preference for interventions targeting young children and young adults than was suggested by the 'lives saved' model.
Marginal effects also suggested a weaker preference for interventions targeting young children and young adults in the life-years saved model than in the lives saved model.
(C3) In general, staff expressed a preference for interventions which were consistent with their emphasis on identifying medical causes for falls; they were less convinced of the value of psychological interventions such as CBT: "So if you were saying to me they can have CBT or they can have an exercise group what would I choose?
While marginal effects for age/life-stage dummies in the lives saved model may be partly attributable to capacity to benefit, marginal effects from the LYs saved model were consistent with a preference for interventions targeting young children and young adults even after correcting for duration of benefit.
In order of importance, policy makers expressed a preference for interventions that are highly effective, that are preventive of nature (as compared to care and treatment), that are based on strong scientific evidence, that target high risk groups (as compared to teenagers, adults, or children), and that target both genders (rather than only men or women).
Latent class analysis revealed three distinct groups of parental preferences for intervention content: a healthy cooking group, focused on nutrition and cooking healthier food; a child persuasion group, focused on convincing toddlers to eat home-cooked food; and a creative cooking group, focused on cooking without recipes, meal planning, and time-saving strategies.
The interviews with the parents on their experiences with the interventions, and therapists' preferences for intervention will be analyzed using qualitative analyses.
Hence data on the acceptability and preferences for intervention derived from such trials may not be generalisable to all patients in the primary care setting.
