Doing Collaborative Health Promotion Research in a Complex Setting: Lessons Learned from the COMPLETE Project in Norway

Preventing Loneliness and Reducing Dropout: Results from the COMPLETE Intervention Study in Upper Secondary Schools in Norway

“…On the one hand, this is somewhat surprising, considering the comprehensive efforts on several levels (universal, selected, and indicated) that could be expected to help students with their progression. We can only speculate on possible explanations, but it could be that the range of measures within the multi-tier intervention was too comprehensive to implement within the project period to be effective in reaching its aims for school completion [ 13 ]. Previous research shows that interventions must be implemented according to their intentions to be effective [ 12 ].…”

“…Previous research shows that interventions must be implemented according to their intentions to be effective [ 12 ]. In previous descriptive analyses of our material, we found that within the multi-tier group, the schools with higher implementation fidelity and integration showed higher completion rates compared to schools with lower implementation fidelity and integration [ 13 ]. As such, it could be that the very comprehensiveness of the intervention prevented sufficient implementation to reach the potential for higher completion rates.…”

“…Multi-tier interventions are more demanding to implement than single-tier interventions [ 13 ], but our results suggest that they may be more effective in catering deeper change regarding how a larger proportion of students experience social life in and outside of school. Further, the completion and dropout of upper secondary education is a complex field that is not merely a matter of counting students who pass subjects.…”

“…While there are indications of what type of intervention efforts can be effective in the landscape of loneliness and school completion, there is still a call for more rigorous testing of such interventions, taking local context into consideration [ 11 ], and determining the right balance between universal and targeted interventions [ 12 ]. Acknowledging that universal interventions are easier, less burdensome for schools, and often less expensive to implement than more targeted measures or combinations of universal and targeted interventions, it is prudent to assess how various combinations of interventions contribute to mitigating the challenges of loneliness and dropout [ 13 ].…”