Cargando…

Improving public health evaluation: a qualitative investigation of practitioners' needs

BACKGROUND: In 2011, the House of Lords published a report on Behaviour Change, in which they report that “a lot more could, and should, be done to improve the evaluation of interventions.” This study aimed to undertake a needs assessment of what kind of evaluation training and materials would be of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Denford, Sarah, Lakshman, Rajalakshmi, Callaghan, Margaret, Abraham, Charles
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5789639/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29378553
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5075-8
_version_ 1783296322127790080
author Denford, Sarah
Lakshman, Rajalakshmi
Callaghan, Margaret
Abraham, Charles
author_facet Denford, Sarah
Lakshman, Rajalakshmi
Callaghan, Margaret
Abraham, Charles
author_sort Denford, Sarah
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In 2011, the House of Lords published a report on Behaviour Change, in which they report that “a lot more could, and should, be done to improve the evaluation of interventions.” This study aimed to undertake a needs assessment of what kind of evaluation training and materials would be of most use to UK public health practitioners by conducting interviews with practitioners about everyday evaluation practice and needed guidance and materials. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 32 public health practitioners in two UK regions, Cambridgeshire and the South West. Participants included directors of public health, consultants in public health, health improvement advisors, public health intelligence, and public health research officers. A topic guide included questions designed to explore participants existing evaluation practice and their needs for further training and guidance. Data were analysed using thematic analyses. RESULTS: Practitioners highlighted the need for evaluation to defend the effectiveness of existing programs and protect funding provisions. However, practitioners often lacked training in evaluation, and felt unqualified to perform such a task. The majority of practitioners did not use, or were not aware of many existing evaluation guidance documents. They wanted quality-assured, practical guidance that relate to the real world settings in which they operate. Practitioners also mentioned the need for better links and support from academics in public health. CONCLUSION: Whilst numerous guidance documents supporting public health evaluation exist, these documents are currently underused by practitioners – either because they are not considered useful, or because practitioners are not aware of them. Integrating existing guides into a catalogue of guidance documents, and developing a new-quality assured, practical and useful document may support the evaluation of public health programs. This in turn has the potential to identify those programs that are effective; thus improving public health and reducing financial waste.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5789639
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57896392018-02-08 Improving public health evaluation: a qualitative investigation of practitioners' needs Denford, Sarah Lakshman, Rajalakshmi Callaghan, Margaret Abraham, Charles BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: In 2011, the House of Lords published a report on Behaviour Change, in which they report that “a lot more could, and should, be done to improve the evaluation of interventions.” This study aimed to undertake a needs assessment of what kind of evaluation training and materials would be of most use to UK public health practitioners by conducting interviews with practitioners about everyday evaluation practice and needed guidance and materials. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 32 public health practitioners in two UK regions, Cambridgeshire and the South West. Participants included directors of public health, consultants in public health, health improvement advisors, public health intelligence, and public health research officers. A topic guide included questions designed to explore participants existing evaluation practice and their needs for further training and guidance. Data were analysed using thematic analyses. RESULTS: Practitioners highlighted the need for evaluation to defend the effectiveness of existing programs and protect funding provisions. However, practitioners often lacked training in evaluation, and felt unqualified to perform such a task. The majority of practitioners did not use, or were not aware of many existing evaluation guidance documents. They wanted quality-assured, practical guidance that relate to the real world settings in which they operate. Practitioners also mentioned the need for better links and support from academics in public health. CONCLUSION: Whilst numerous guidance documents supporting public health evaluation exist, these documents are currently underused by practitioners – either because they are not considered useful, or because practitioners are not aware of them. Integrating existing guides into a catalogue of guidance documents, and developing a new-quality assured, practical and useful document may support the evaluation of public health programs. This in turn has the potential to identify those programs that are effective; thus improving public health and reducing financial waste. BioMed Central 2018-01-30 /pmc/articles/PMC5789639/ /pubmed/29378553 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5075-8 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 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 Research Article
Denford, Sarah
Lakshman, Rajalakshmi
Callaghan, Margaret
Abraham, Charles
Improving public health evaluation: a qualitative investigation of practitioners' needs
title Improving public health evaluation: a qualitative investigation of practitioners' needs
title_full Improving public health evaluation: a qualitative investigation of practitioners' needs
title_fullStr Improving public health evaluation: a qualitative investigation of practitioners' needs
title_full_unstemmed Improving public health evaluation: a qualitative investigation of practitioners' needs
title_short Improving public health evaluation: a qualitative investigation of practitioners' needs
title_sort improving public health evaluation: a qualitative investigation of practitioners' needs
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5789639/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29378553
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5075-8
work_keys_str_mv AT denfordsarah improvingpublichealthevaluationaqualitativeinvestigationofpractitionersneeds
AT lakshmanrajalakshmi improvingpublichealthevaluationaqualitativeinvestigationofpractitionersneeds
AT callaghanmargaret improvingpublichealthevaluationaqualitativeinvestigationofpractitionersneeds
AT abrahamcharles improvingpublichealthevaluationaqualitativeinvestigationofpractitionersneeds