MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416187681 · doi:10.1186/s12875-025-02987-8

Barriers and facilitators to implementing a pilot produce prescription program in a community health setting in Toronto, Canada

2025· article· en· W4416187681 on OpenAlexaffabout
Madison Fach, Rose Holub, Amy Cheng, Ashleigh Domingo

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Primary Care · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReferralPrimary careHealth careCommunity healthMental healthAdaptabilityKey (lock)Medical prescription

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Produce prescription programs (PRx) are gaining traction in Canada and globally as an approach to promote food security and healthy diets. Unison Health and Community Services (Unison), a community health centre in Toronto, Canada, piloted a PRx program to promote food access and healthy eating for adults with experiences of food insecurity and chronic disease risk factors. In this study, we explored the barriers and facilitators to implementing a pilot PRx program in a community health setting to inform program improvements, including opportunities to better meet participant health needs and preferences. METHODS: Participant follow-up calls, focus group discussions, and semi-structured key informant interviews were conducted in person and online. Detailed call logs and interview transcripts were analyzed thematically using a hybrid inductive-deductive approach guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to identify barriers and facilitators to program implementation. RESULTS: Key themes were identified across the five domains of the CFIR: (i) Innovation, (ii) Outer Setting, (iii) Inner Setting, (iv) Individuals, and (v) Implementation Process. In total, 19 themes were selected across 14 CFIR constructs, including six inductive sub-themes. The main barriers included the outdoor and public designs of the market, reduced staffing on the clinical team, and a lack of communication infrastructure between primary care providers, program providers, and program participants. Key facilitators included the integration of the PRx pilot into existing Unison programs, the inclusion of nutrition education workshops, and the person-centered and adaptable approach adopted by program providers. These facilitators supported participant referrals and program satisfaction, contributing to participants' desire to continue engaging in the program. CONCLUSIONS: This study, guided by the CFIR, revealed valuable insights into the barriers and facilitators that may influence the implementation of a PRx program in community health settings. Study findings emphasize the importance of team-based care to ensure program adaptability and support a person-centered approach. Identifying key champions within primary care teams is needed to strengthen referral pathways and communication with program providers. Future PRx programs may consider incorporating opportunities for knowledge sharing with participants and community-building activities to address important needs related to social connection, community belonging, and mental health.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.144
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.410 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Primary CareSame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207