ArticleThe Milbank quarterly2011
Assessing the evaluability of complex public health interventions: five questions for researchers, funders, and policymakers.
Article in The Milbank quarterly, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 2 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
47 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Using natural experiments to improve public health evidence: a review of context and utility for obesity prevention.Health research policy and systems · 2020Pooled it
- What is the impact on health and wellbeing of interventions that foster respect and social inclusion in community-residing older adults? A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies.Systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Trial
- 'Well London' and the benefits of participation: results of a qualitative study nested in a cluster randomised trial.BMJ open · 2014Trial
- Trial
- Conducting cross-sectoral collaborative research for food system transformation: learnings from a qualitative evaluation study.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Evaluability assessment of a targeted national anti-child poverty policy: option appraisal for evaluating the Scottish Child Payment.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Usability, acceptability, and tolerability of a virtual reality patient tour compared to an educational video in cardiac surgery patients - A feasibility study.PEC innovation · 2026Article
- Co-creating a program theory and evaluability assessment for an Irish single-session, synchronous chat-based youth mental health intervention: implications for outcome evaluation.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Methodological development for core outcome sets in population health research: a mixed-methods study.Trials · 2025Article
- Using natural experiments to evaluate population health and health system interventions: new framework for producers and users of evidence.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- Article
- Prioritisation processes for programme implementation and evaluation in public health: A scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Exploring the potential impact of the proposed UK TV and online food advertising regulations: a concept mapping study.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Identifying priorities for research on financial risk protection to achieve universal health coverage: a scoping overview of reviews.BMJ open · 2022Article
- How should we evaluate sweetened beverage tax policies? A review of worldwide experience.BMC public health · 2021Review
- A new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions: update of Medical Research Council guidance.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2021Article
- Framework for the development and evaluation of complex interventions: gap analysis, workshop and consultation-informed update.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2021Article
- Impacts of a New Supermarket on Dietary Behavior and the Local Foodscape in Kisumu, Kenya: Protocol for a Mixed Methods, Natural Experimental Study.JMIR research protocols · 2020Article
- Making sense of the evidence in population health intervention research: building a dry stone wall.BMJ global health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
contextEvidence 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.
methodsUsing 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.
findingsThis 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.
conclusionsThe principles of this approach may be generalizable, and should be tested and refined for other complex public health and wider social interventions.
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.