ArticleArts & health2012
Managing Evaluation: A Community Arts Organisation Perspective.
Article in Arts & health, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 'The medical' and 'health' in a critical medical humanities.The Journal of medical humanities · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundArts and health organisations must increasingly provide measurable evidence of impact to stakeholders, which can pose both logistical and ideological challenges. This paper examines the relationship between the ethos of an arts and health organisation with external demands for evaluation.
methodsResearch involved an ethnographic engagement where the first author worked closely with the organisation for a year. In addition to informal discussions, twenty semi-structured interviews were conducted with core staff and participants. Transcribed interviews were coded and emerging themes were identified.
resultsStaff considered evaluation to be necessary and useful, yet also to be time consuming and a potential threat to their ethos. Nevertheless, they were able to negotiate the terms of evaluation to enable them to meet their own needs as well as those of funders and other stakeholders.
conclusionsWhile not completely resisting outside demands for evaluation, the organisation was seen to intentionally rework demands for evidence into processes they felt they could work with, thus enabling their ethos to be maintained.
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.