Ches Area Of Responsibility Iv

Front 1

Evaluation

Back 1

assess a process or program to provide evidence & feedback for the program

Front 2

Research

Back 2

An organized process using the scientific method for investigation of problems. It involves systematic progression through a series of necessary steps

Front 3

Reliability

Back 3

refers to the consistency, dependability, & stability of the measurement process

Front 4

Validity

Back 4

The degree to which a test or assessment measures what it is intended to measure.

Front 5

Variables

Back 5

Operational forms of a construct. They designate how the construct will be measured in designated scenarios.

Front 6

Formative Evaluation

Back 6

Looks at an ongoing process of evaluation from planning through implementation

Front 7

Process Evaluation

Back 7

Any combination of measures that occur as a program is being implemented to assure or improve the quality of performance or delivery

Front 8

Summative Evaluation

Back 8

Often associated with measures or judgements that enable the investigator to draw conclusions

Front 9

Impact Evaluations

Back 9

Focuses on immediate & observable effects of a program leading to the desired outcomes

Front 10

Outcome Evaluation

Back 10

focused on the ultimate goal, product or policy. Measured in terms of morbidity & mortality

Front 11

Search Strategies

Back 11

Identify key search terms

Identify a period of time to conduct the search (i.e. 2005-2010)

Characteristics of the population

Health conditions

Front 12

Systematic Reviews

Back 12

a published qualitative review of a comprehensive synthesis of publications on particular topics

Front 13

Meta-analyses

Back 13

a systematic method of evaluating statistical data based on results of several independent studies of the same problem

Front 14

Pooled Analyses

Back 14

a method for collecting all the individual data from a group of studies, combining them into one large set of data & analyzing the data as if it came from one big study

Front 15

Cohort

Back 15

A cohort is a group of people who share a common characteristic or experience within a defined period (e.g., are born, are exposed to a drug or vaccine or pollutant, or undergo a certain medical procedure).

Front 16

8 Questions to ask when evaluating research

Back 16

1. Was the purpose of the study stated

2. was the research question or hypothesis stated?

3. were the subjects in the study described?

4. was the design & location of study described

5. were the data collection instruments used described?

6. Did the presented results reflect the research question/hypothesis

7. were the conclusions reflective if the research design & analyses used?

8. were the implications meaningful to the priority population?

Front 17

Quantitative Methodology

Back 17

focuses on quantifying or measuring things related to health educational programs through the use of numerical data to help predict or describe a phenomena

Front 18

Qualitative Methodology

Back 18

Descriptive in nature and attempts to discover meaning or interpret why phenomena are occuring

Front 19

Mixed Methodology

Back 19

uses both quantitative and qualitative methodology to "tell the story" and describe classifications, as well as to indicate why a phenomena is occurring within a population

Front 20

Data analysis plan for evaluation

Back 20

the data that has been collected can be integrated and structured in order to ensure understanding and use of the data

Front 21

common data collection strategies

Back 21

face to face

telephone

self-administered

traditional mail

electronic platforms

Front 22

Qualitative Method Phenomena to Avoid

Back 22

1. assumptions that everyone has a common knowledge base

2. abbreviations

3. leading questions that demand a specific response

4. questions that use 2 negative words

5. long lists of choices

6. recall questions over extended time frames

Front 23

Quantitative Method Phenomena to Avoid

Back 23

1. items that ask a yes/no question or those that have a specific answer

2. being too broad to capture useful information

3. being to specific with probing items

4. asking too many questions

Front 24

Content Validity

Back 24

considers the instrument's items of measurement for the relevant areas of interest

Front 25

Criterion Validity

Back 25

refers to one measure's correlation to another measure of a variable

Front 26

Construct Validity

Back 26

ensures that the concepts of an instrument relate to the concepts of a particular theory

Front 27

Discipline specific evaluation models

Back 27

1. Attainment

2. Decision-making

3. Goal-free

4. Naturalistic

5. System Analysis

6. Utilization-focused

Front 28

Attainment

Back 28

Focused on program goals and serves as standards for evaluation

Front 29

Decision-Making

Back 29

Based on four components designed to provide the user with context, inputs, processes & products with which to make decisions

Front 30

Goal-Free

Back 30

not based on goals, evaluator searched for all outcomes including intended positive & negative side effects

Front 31

Naturalistic

Back 31

focused on qualitative data & uses responsive information from participants in a program; must be concerned with narrative explaining "why" behavior did not change

Front 32

System Analysis

Back 32

based on efficiency that uses coast-benefits or cost-effectiveness analysis to quantify effects of a program

Front 33

Utilization- Focused

Back 33

done for and with a specific population

Front 34

Evaluation Framework

Back 34

developed to summarize and organize essential elements of program evaluation

Front 35

CDC 6 Step Framework for Program Eval

Back 35

1. Engage Stakeholders

2. Describe the program

3. Focus the evaluation design

4. Gather credible evidence

5. Justify conclusions

6. Ensure use and share lessons learned

Front 36

Randomized

Back 36

all clusters or participants in the experiment have and equal chance of being allocated to each group of study

Front 37

Quasi-randomized

Back 37

allocate participation in the a study based on some scheme

Front 38

Non-randomized

Back 38

do not use random allocation of participants or groups or individuals to assign arbitrarily

Front 39

Descriptive Study

Back 39

Describes

is more exploratory

profiles characteristics of group

focuses on WHAT

Assumes no hypothesis

Requires no comparison group

Front 40

Analytical Study

Back 40

Explains

is more exploratory

analyzes why a group has characteristics

focuses on WHY

Assumes a hypothesis

Requires a comparison group

Front 41

Probability Sample (Random Sample)

Back 41

is drawn when observations and measurements from the total population would be too costly, not feasible or unnecessary

Front 42

stratified sample

Back 42

divides a population into segments based on characteristics of importance for the research

Front 43

non-probability sample

Back 43

not representative and less desirable than probability samples

Front 44

Qualitative Research

Back 44

extremely useful to achieve a deep understanding of how people think about specific topics

Front 45

Qualitative Analysis

Back 45

enables the researcher to describe the phenomena of interest in great detail and in the original language of the research participants

Front 46

Steps to Qualitative Data Analysis

Back 46

1. Data reduction

2. Data display

3. conclusion drawing and verification

Front 47

Data reduction

Back 47

involves selecting, focusing, condensing, and transforming data.

Front 48

Data Display

Back 48

creating an organized, compressed way of arranging data.

Front 49

Conclusion Drawing & Verification

Back 49

the data is revisited multiple times to verify, test, or confirm the themes & patterns identified

Front 50

5 Elements critical for evaluation

Back 50

1. Design

2. preparation

3. Feedback

4. Follow-up

5. Dissemination

Front 51

Confounding Variables

Back 51

extraneous variables outside the scope of the intervention

Front 52

Parts of a report

Back 52

1. Introduction

2. Explanation of relevant studies and an understanding of the background of the study

3. Methodology

4. Results section

5. Conclusions, recommendations, or a summary

Front 53

Policy Analysis

Back 53

defined as the use of any evaluative research to improve or legitimate the practical implications of a policy-oriented program

Front 54

Steps to conducting a Health Impact Assessment (HIA)

Back 54

1. Screening to identify projects or policies for which an HIA would be useful

2. Scoping to identify which health effects to consider

3. assessing risks and benefits to identify which people may be affected & how they may be affected

4. Developing recommendations to suggest changes to proposals, to promote positive or mitigate adverse health effects

5. reporting to present the result to decision makers

6. evaluating to determine the effects of the HIA on the decision