Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/25284
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBelford, Melissaen_UK
dc.contributor.authorRobertson, Tonyen_UK
dc.contributor.authorJepson, Ruthen_UK
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-24T22:43:01Z-
dc.date.available2017-05-24T22:43:01Z-
dc.date.issued2017-04-21en_UK
dc.identifier.other70en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/25284-
dc.description.abstractBackground Evaluation of the potential effectiveness of a programme’s objectives (health or otherwise) is important in demonstrating how programmes work. However, evaluations are expensive and can focus on unrealistic outcomes not grounded in strong theory, especially where there is pressure to show effectiveness. The aim of this research was to demonstrate that the evaluability assessment (a cost-effective pre-evaluation tool that primarily gives quick, constructive feedback) can be used to help develop programme and outcome objectives to improve programmes while they run and to assist in producing more effective evaluations. This was done using the example of a community development programme aiming to improve health and reduce health inequalities in its target population. Methods The setting was Glasgow, Scotland, UK and focused on the Health Issues in the Community programme. Data were collected from documents and nine individual stakeholder interviews. Thematic analysis and a realist approach were used to analyse both datasets and, in conjunction with a workshop with stakeholders, produce a logic model of the programme theory and related evaluation options to explore further.  Results Five main themes emerged from the analysis: History; Framework; Structure and Delivery of the Course; Theory of Action; and Barriers to Delivery and Successful Outcomes. These themes aided in drafting the logic model which revealed they key programme activities (e.g. facilitating group learning) and 23 potential outcomes. The majority of these outcomes (16) were deemed to be short-term outcomes (more easily measured within the timeframe of an individual being involved in the programme) e.g. increased self-esteem or awareness of individual/community health. The remaining 6 outcomes were deemed longer-term and included outcomes such as increased social capital and individual mental health and wellbeing.  Conclusions We have shown that the evaluability assessment tool can be applied to the evaluation of community health programmes, providing short- and long-term outcomes that could be evaluated to demonstrate effectiveness and avoid unnecessary or poorly designed full-scale evaluations. This type of pre-evaluation method is already a useful resource for national policy evaluations, but could be a valuable evaluation tool for other regional or community health programmes.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherBioMed Centralen_UK
dc.relationBelford M, Robertson T & Jepson R (2017) Using evaluability assessment to assess local community development health programmes: a Scottish case-study. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 17, Art. No.: 70. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0334-4en_UK
dc.rights© The Author(s). 2017 This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.en_UK
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_UK
dc.subjectstudy designen_UK
dc.subjectevaluationen_UK
dc.subjectcommunityen_UK
dc.subjecthealthen_UK
dc.subjectinequalitiesen_UK
dc.titleUsing evaluability assessment to assess local community development health programmes: a Scottish case-studyen_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12874-017-0334-4en_UK
dc.identifier.pmid28431505en_UK
dc.citation.jtitleBMC Medical Research Methodologyen_UK
dc.citation.issn1471-2288en_UK
dc.citation.volume17en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusVoR - Version of Recorden_UK
dc.author.emailtony.robertson@stir.ac.uken_UK
dc.citation.date21/04/2017en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationScottish Collaboration for Public Health Research & Policyen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationHealth Sciences Stirlingen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationScottish Collaboration for Public Health Research & Policyen_UK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000399639600001en_UK
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-85018503368en_UK
dc.identifier.wtid531023en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-1962-5874en_UK
dc.date.accepted2017-03-29en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2017-04-25en_UK
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
art3A10.11862Fs12874-017-0334-4.pdfFulltext - Published Version1.05 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.