Evaluation designs for adequacy, plausibility and probability of public health programme performance and impact.
The question of why to evaluate a programme is seldom discussed in the literature.
The present paper argues that the answer to this question is essential for choosing an appropriate evaluation design.
The discussion is centered on summative evaluations of large-scale programme effectiveness, drawing upon examples from the fields of health and nutrition but the findings may be applicable to other subject areas.
The main objective of an evaluation is to influence decisions.
How complex and precise the evaluation must be depends on who the decision maker is and on what types of decisions will be taken as a consequence of the findings.
Different decision makers demand not only different types of information but also vary in their requirements of how informative and precise the findings must be.
Both complex and simple evaluations, however, should be equally rigorous in relating the design to the decisions.
Based on the types of decisions that may be taken, a framework is proposed for deciding upon appropriate evaluation designs.
Its first axis concerns the indicators of interest, whether these refer to provision or utilization of services, coverage or impact measures.
The second axis refers to the type of inference to be made, whether this is a statement of adequacy, plausibility or probability.
In addition to the above framework, other factors affect the choice of an evaluation design, including the efficacy of the intervention, the field of knowledge, timing and costs. (...)
Mots-clés Pascal : Programme sanitaire, Etude impact, Indicateur, Epidémiologie, Evaluation, Efficacité, Méthodologie, Homme
Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Sanitary program, Impact study, Indicator, Epidemiology, Evaluation, Efficiency, Methodology, Human
Notice produite par :
Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique
Cote : 99-0146742
Code Inist : 002B30A01A1. Création : 16/11/1999.