Limits...
Expanding assessments of translational research programs: supplementing metrics with value judgments.

Scott CS, Nagasawa PR, Abernethy NF, Ramsey BW, Martin PJ, Hacker BM, Schwartz HD, Brock DM, Robins LS, Wolf FM, Carter-Dubois M, Disis ML - Eval Health Prof (2013)

Bottom Line: The University of Washington (UW) Institute for Translational Health Sciences (ITHS), funded by a Clinical and Translational Sciences Award program, has supplemented its initial Kellogg Logic Model-based program evaluation with the eight judgment-based evaluative elements of the World Health Organization's (WHO) Health Services Assessment Model.This article describes the relationship between the two models, the rationale for the decision to supplement the evaluation with WHO evaluative elements, the value-added results of the WHO evaluative elements, and plans for further developing the WHO assessments.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Biomedical Informatics and Medical Education, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

ABSTRACT
The University of Washington (UW) Institute for Translational Health Sciences (ITHS), funded by a Clinical and Translational Sciences Award program, has supplemented its initial Kellogg Logic Model-based program evaluation with the eight judgment-based evaluative elements of the World Health Organization's (WHO) Health Services Assessment Model. This article describes the relationship between the two models, the rationale for the decision to supplement the evaluation with WHO evaluative elements, the value-added results of the WHO evaluative elements, and plans for further developing the WHO assessments.

Show MeSH
The 2010 (first administration) versus 2011 (second administration) of members’ and users’ service rating of Community Outreach and Research Translation (CORT) overall, based on the eight World Health Organization evaluative elements.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2 - License 3
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4012871&req=5

fig3-0163278713500984: The 2010 (first administration) versus 2011 (second administration) of members’ and users’ service rating of Community Outreach and Research Translation (CORT) overall, based on the eight World Health Organization evaluative elements.

Mentions: Figure 3 shows WHO element ratings for one ITHS core, namely, Community Outreach and Research Translation (CORT). The CORT ratings were high. More than 80% of CORT users reported either positive views of or saw potential value for CORT services. The WHO elements of relevance and research process were rated the highest. Even the lower rated WHO elements, process and equity, were viewed as having potential by 24% and 25%, respectively. In the second WHO administration, all elements declined but remained high; equity showed the largest decrease.


Expanding assessments of translational research programs: supplementing metrics with value judgments.

Scott CS, Nagasawa PR, Abernethy NF, Ramsey BW, Martin PJ, Hacker BM, Schwartz HD, Brock DM, Robins LS, Wolf FM, Carter-Dubois M, Disis ML - Eval Health Prof (2013)

The 2010 (first administration) versus 2011 (second administration) of members’ and users’ service rating of Community Outreach and Research Translation (CORT) overall, based on the eight World Health Organization evaluative elements.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2 - License 3
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4012871&req=5

fig3-0163278713500984: The 2010 (first administration) versus 2011 (second administration) of members’ and users’ service rating of Community Outreach and Research Translation (CORT) overall, based on the eight World Health Organization evaluative elements.
Mentions: Figure 3 shows WHO element ratings for one ITHS core, namely, Community Outreach and Research Translation (CORT). The CORT ratings were high. More than 80% of CORT users reported either positive views of or saw potential value for CORT services. The WHO elements of relevance and research process were rated the highest. Even the lower rated WHO elements, process and equity, were viewed as having potential by 24% and 25%, respectively. In the second WHO administration, all elements declined but remained high; equity showed the largest decrease.

Bottom Line: The University of Washington (UW) Institute for Translational Health Sciences (ITHS), funded by a Clinical and Translational Sciences Award program, has supplemented its initial Kellogg Logic Model-based program evaluation with the eight judgment-based evaluative elements of the World Health Organization's (WHO) Health Services Assessment Model.This article describes the relationship between the two models, the rationale for the decision to supplement the evaluation with WHO evaluative elements, the value-added results of the WHO evaluative elements, and plans for further developing the WHO assessments.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Biomedical Informatics and Medical Education, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

ABSTRACT
The University of Washington (UW) Institute for Translational Health Sciences (ITHS), funded by a Clinical and Translational Sciences Award program, has supplemented its initial Kellogg Logic Model-based program evaluation with the eight judgment-based evaluative elements of the World Health Organization's (WHO) Health Services Assessment Model. This article describes the relationship between the two models, the rationale for the decision to supplement the evaluation with WHO evaluative elements, the value-added results of the WHO evaluative elements, and plans for further developing the WHO assessments.

Show MeSH