Cargando…

Frameworks for evaluating health research capacity strengthening: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND: Health research capacity strengthening (RCS) projects are often complex and hard to evaluate. In order to inform health RCS evaluation efforts, we aimed to describe and compare key characteristics of existing health RCS evaluation frameworks: their process of development, purpose, target...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Boyd, Alan, Cole, Donald C, Cho, Dan-Bi, Aslanyan, Garry, Bates, Imelda
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3878679/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24330628
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-4505-11-46
_version_ 1782297850839826432
author Boyd, Alan
Cole, Donald C
Cho, Dan-Bi
Aslanyan, Garry
Bates, Imelda
author_facet Boyd, Alan
Cole, Donald C
Cho, Dan-Bi
Aslanyan, Garry
Bates, Imelda
author_sort Boyd, Alan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Health research capacity strengthening (RCS) projects are often complex and hard to evaluate. In order to inform health RCS evaluation efforts, we aimed to describe and compare key characteristics of existing health RCS evaluation frameworks: their process of development, purpose, target users, structure, content and coverage of important evaluation issues. A secondary objective was to explore what use had been made of the ESSENCE framework, which attempts to address one such issue: harmonising the evaluation requirements of different funders. METHODS: We identified and analysed health RCS evaluation frameworks published by seven funding agencies between 2004 and 2012, using a mixed methods approach involving structured qualitative analyses of documents, a stakeholder survey and consultations with key contacts in health RCS funding agencies. RESULTS: The frameworks were intended for use predominantly by the organisations themselves, and most were oriented primarily towards funders’ internal organisational performance requirements. The frameworks made limited reference to theories that specifically concern RCS. Generic devices, such as logical frameworks, were typically used to document activities, outputs and outcomes, but with little emphasis on exploring underlying assumptions or contextual constraints. Usage of the ESSENCE framework appeared limited. CONCLUSIONS: We believe that there is scope for improving frameworks through the incorporation of more accessible information about how to do evaluation in practice; greater involvement of stakeholders, following evaluation capacity building principles; greater emphasis on explaining underlying rationales of frameworks; and structuring frameworks so that they separate generic and project-specific aspects of health RCS evaluation. The third and fourth of these improvements might assist harmonisation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3878679
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-38786792014-01-03 Frameworks for evaluating health research capacity strengthening: a qualitative study Boyd, Alan Cole, Donald C Cho, Dan-Bi Aslanyan, Garry Bates, Imelda Health Res Policy Syst Research BACKGROUND: Health research capacity strengthening (RCS) projects are often complex and hard to evaluate. In order to inform health RCS evaluation efforts, we aimed to describe and compare key characteristics of existing health RCS evaluation frameworks: their process of development, purpose, target users, structure, content and coverage of important evaluation issues. A secondary objective was to explore what use had been made of the ESSENCE framework, which attempts to address one such issue: harmonising the evaluation requirements of different funders. METHODS: We identified and analysed health RCS evaluation frameworks published by seven funding agencies between 2004 and 2012, using a mixed methods approach involving structured qualitative analyses of documents, a stakeholder survey and consultations with key contacts in health RCS funding agencies. RESULTS: The frameworks were intended for use predominantly by the organisations themselves, and most were oriented primarily towards funders’ internal organisational performance requirements. The frameworks made limited reference to theories that specifically concern RCS. Generic devices, such as logical frameworks, were typically used to document activities, outputs and outcomes, but with little emphasis on exploring underlying assumptions or contextual constraints. Usage of the ESSENCE framework appeared limited. CONCLUSIONS: We believe that there is scope for improving frameworks through the incorporation of more accessible information about how to do evaluation in practice; greater involvement of stakeholders, following evaluation capacity building principles; greater emphasis on explaining underlying rationales of frameworks; and structuring frameworks so that they separate generic and project-specific aspects of health RCS evaluation. The third and fourth of these improvements might assist harmonisation. BioMed Central 2013-12-14 /pmc/articles/PMC3878679/ /pubmed/24330628 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-4505-11-46 Text en Copyright © 2013 Boyd et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 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.
spellingShingle Research
Boyd, Alan
Cole, Donald C
Cho, Dan-Bi
Aslanyan, Garry
Bates, Imelda
Frameworks for evaluating health research capacity strengthening: a qualitative study
title Frameworks for evaluating health research capacity strengthening: a qualitative study
title_full Frameworks for evaluating health research capacity strengthening: a qualitative study
title_fullStr Frameworks for evaluating health research capacity strengthening: a qualitative study
title_full_unstemmed Frameworks for evaluating health research capacity strengthening: a qualitative study
title_short Frameworks for evaluating health research capacity strengthening: a qualitative study
title_sort frameworks for evaluating health research capacity strengthening: a qualitative study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3878679/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24330628
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-4505-11-46
work_keys_str_mv AT boydalan frameworksforevaluatinghealthresearchcapacitystrengtheningaqualitativestudy
AT coledonaldc frameworksforevaluatinghealthresearchcapacitystrengtheningaqualitativestudy
AT chodanbi frameworksforevaluatinghealthresearchcapacitystrengtheningaqualitativestudy
AT aslanyangarry frameworksforevaluatinghealthresearchcapacitystrengtheningaqualitativestudy
AT batesimelda frameworksforevaluatinghealthresearchcapacitystrengtheningaqualitativestudy