Premium
Assessing the Evaluability of Complex Public Health Interventions: Five Questions for Researchers, Funders, and Policymakers
Author(s) -
OGILVIE DAVID,
CUMMINS STEVEN,
PETTICREW MARK,
WHITE MARTIN,
JONES ANDY,
WHEELER KATHRYN
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
the milbank quarterly
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.563
H-Index - 101
eISSN - 1468-0009
pISSN - 0887-378X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2011.00626.x
Subject(s) - psychological intervention , public relations , set (abstract data type) , government (linguistics) , public health , intervention (counseling) , resource (disambiguation) , political science , psychology , public economics , medicine , nursing , economics , computer science , computer network , linguistics , philosophy , programming language
Context: Evidence to support government programs to improve public health often is weak. Recognition of this “knowledge gap” has led to calls for more and better evaluation, but decisions about priorities for evaluation also need to be addressed in regard to financial restraint. Methods: Using England's Healthy Community Challenge Fund as a case study, this article presents a set of questions to stimulate and structure debate among researchers, funders, and policymakers and help make decisions about evaluation within and between complex public health interventions as they evolve from initial concept to dissemination of full‐scale intervention packages. Findings: This approach can be used to identify the types of knowledge that might be generated from any evaluation, given the strength of evidence available in response to each of five questions, and to support a more systematic consideration of resource allocation decisions, depending on the types of knowledge required. Conclusions: The principles of this approach may be generalizable, and should be tested and refined for other complex public health and wider social interventions.