Cargando…

Using theory of change to design and evaluate public health interventions: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing popularity of the theory of change (ToC) approach, little is known about the extent to which ToC has been used in the design and evaluation of public health interventions. This review aims to determine how ToCs have been developed and used in the development and ev...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Breuer, Erica, Lee, Lucy, De Silva, Mary, Lund, Crick
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4859947/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27153985
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0422-6
_version_ 1782431011574906880
author Breuer, Erica
Lee, Lucy
De Silva, Mary
Lund, Crick
author_facet Breuer, Erica
Lee, Lucy
De Silva, Mary
Lund, Crick
author_sort Breuer, Erica
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing popularity of the theory of change (ToC) approach, little is known about the extent to which ToC has been used in the design and evaluation of public health interventions. This review aims to determine how ToCs have been developed and used in the development and evaluation of public health interventions globally. METHODS: We searched for papers reporting the use of “theory of change” in the development or evaluation of public health interventions in databases of peer-reviewed journal articles such as Scopus, Pubmed, PsychInfo, grey literature databases, Google and websites of development funders. We included papers of any date, language or study design. Both abstracts and full text papers were double screened. Data were extracted and narratively and quantitatively summarised. RESULTS: A total of 62 papers were included in the review. Forty-nine (79 %) described the development of ToC, 18 (29 %) described the use of ToC in the development of the intervention and 49 (79 %) described the use of ToC in the evaluation of the intervention. Although a large number of papers were included in the review, their descriptions of the ToC development and use in intervention design and evaluation lacked detail. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the ToC approach is widespread in the public health literature. Clear reporting of the ToC process and outputs is important to strengthen the body of literature on practical application of ToC in order to develop our understanding of the benefits and advantages of using ToC. We also propose a checklist for reporting on the use of ToC to ensure transparent reporting and recommend that our checklist is used and refined by authors reporting the ToC approach. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0422-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4859947
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48599472016-05-08 Using theory of change to design and evaluate public health interventions: a systematic review Breuer, Erica Lee, Lucy De Silva, Mary Lund, Crick Implement Sci Systematic Review BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing popularity of the theory of change (ToC) approach, little is known about the extent to which ToC has been used in the design and evaluation of public health interventions. This review aims to determine how ToCs have been developed and used in the development and evaluation of public health interventions globally. METHODS: We searched for papers reporting the use of “theory of change” in the development or evaluation of public health interventions in databases of peer-reviewed journal articles such as Scopus, Pubmed, PsychInfo, grey literature databases, Google and websites of development funders. We included papers of any date, language or study design. Both abstracts and full text papers were double screened. Data were extracted and narratively and quantitatively summarised. RESULTS: A total of 62 papers were included in the review. Forty-nine (79 %) described the development of ToC, 18 (29 %) described the use of ToC in the development of the intervention and 49 (79 %) described the use of ToC in the evaluation of the intervention. Although a large number of papers were included in the review, their descriptions of the ToC development and use in intervention design and evaluation lacked detail. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the ToC approach is widespread in the public health literature. Clear reporting of the ToC process and outputs is important to strengthen the body of literature on practical application of ToC in order to develop our understanding of the benefits and advantages of using ToC. We also propose a checklist for reporting on the use of ToC to ensure transparent reporting and recommend that our checklist is used and refined by authors reporting the ToC approach. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0422-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-05-06 /pmc/articles/PMC4859947/ /pubmed/27153985 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0422-6 Text en © Breuer et al. 2016 Open AccessThis 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.
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Breuer, Erica
Lee, Lucy
De Silva, Mary
Lund, Crick
Using theory of change to design and evaluate public health interventions: a systematic review
title Using theory of change to design and evaluate public health interventions: a systematic review
title_full Using theory of change to design and evaluate public health interventions: a systematic review
title_fullStr Using theory of change to design and evaluate public health interventions: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Using theory of change to design and evaluate public health interventions: a systematic review
title_short Using theory of change to design and evaluate public health interventions: a systematic review
title_sort using theory of change to design and evaluate public health interventions: a systematic review
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4859947/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27153985
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0422-6
work_keys_str_mv AT breuererica usingtheoryofchangetodesignandevaluatepublichealthinterventionsasystematicreview
AT leelucy usingtheoryofchangetodesignandevaluatepublichealthinterventionsasystematicreview
AT desilvamary usingtheoryofchangetodesignandevaluatepublichealthinterventionsasystematicreview
AT lundcrick usingtheoryofchangetodesignandevaluatepublichealthinterventionsasystematicreview