ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2005
Developing an assessment tool for evaluating community involvement.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Assessing the interactions of people and policy-makers in social participation for health: an inventory of participatory governance measures from a rapid systematic literature review.International journal for equity in health · 2023Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of Community Engagement Outcomes Research in School-Based Health Interventions.The Journal of school health · 2020Pooled it
- Metrics and Evaluation Tools for Patient Engagement in Healthcare Organization- and System-Level Decision-Making: A Systematic Review.International journal of health policy and management · 2018Pooled it
- Motivations of family advisors in engaging in research to improve a palliative approach to care for persons living with dementia: an interpretive descriptive study.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- Evaluating public and patient involvement in interventional research-A newly developed checklist (EPPIIC).PloS one · 2024Article
- Assessing the environment for engagement in health services: The Audit for Consumer Engagement (ACE) tool.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
- Article
- A scoping review of evaluation frameworks and their applicability to real-world physical activity and dietary change programme evaluation.BMC public health · 2020Article
- Patient Engagement and its Evaluation Tools- Current Challenges and Future Directions Comment on "Metrics and Evaluation Tools for Patient Engagement in Healthcare Organization- and System-Level Decision-Making: A Systematic Review".International journal of health policy and management · 2019Article
- Supporting quality public and patient engagement in health system organizations: development and usability testing of the Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2016Article
- Measuring capacity building in communities: a review of the literature.BMC public health · 2011Review
- Collaborating with consumer and community representatives in health and medical research in Australia: results from an evaluation.Health research policy and systems · 2011Article
- Patients' priorities for ambulatory hospital care centres. A survey and discrete choice experiment among elderly and chronically ill patients of a Dutch hospital.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2009Article
- A multidimensional conceptual framework for analysing public involvement in health services research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2008Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrent UK policy has resulted in greater requirements for public and patient participation in health service planning and decision making. Organizations and services need to be able to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness and quality of their community involvement processes, but there are few appropriate evaluation tools or sets of indicators available. This paper reports on work within Bradford Health Action Zone to develop a self-assessment tool for organizations on community involvement.
methodsA multi-agency working group developed the tool. A literature search was undertaken and evaluation resources were reviewed. A set of benchmarks for community involvement in regeneration was utilized in developing the assessment areas. A range of individuals with expertise on community involvement practice and performance management was consulted. The tool was then piloted in two primary care trusts prior to final modifications.
resultsThe process resulted in the production of Well Connected--a self-assessment tool on community involvement designed for organizations to assess their progress and identify areas for improvement. A scoring system assesses evidence of a strategic approach to community involvement, good practice throughout the organization, and a range of opportunities and support. Feedback from the pilots revealed that the tool had facilitated assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of organizational practices.
conclusionThe paper discusses some of the methodological challenges pertaining to the measurement of community involvement. Notwithstanding those challenges, it is argued that Well Connected provides a robust and practical framework that health organizations and their partners can use to assess practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.