Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29471840›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2018

Designing evaluation studies to optimally inform policy: what factors do policy-makers in China consider when making resource allocation decisions on healthcare worker training programmes?

Shishi Wu, Helena Legido-Quigley, Julia Spencer, Richard James Coker, Mishal Sameer Khan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Shishi WuSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, 12 Science Drive 2 #10-01, Singapore, 117549, Singapore.
Helena Legido-QuigleySaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, 12 Science Drive 2 #10-01, Singapore, 117549, Singapore.
Julia SpencerCommunicable Diseases Policy Research Group, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, London, WC1E 7HT, United Kingdom.
Richard James CokerSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, 12 Science Drive 2 #10-01, Singapore, 117549, Singapore.
Mishal Sameer KhanCommunicable Diseases Policy Research Group, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, London, WC1E 7HT, United Kingdom. mishal.khan@lshtm.ac.uk.

Funding

United Way Worldwide 18225
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn light of the gap in evidence to inform future resource allocation decisions about healthcare provider (HCP) training in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), and the considerable donor investments being made towards training interventions, evaluation studies that are optimally designed to inform local policy-makers are needed. The aim of our study is to understand what features of HCP training evaluation studies are important for decision-making by policy-makers in LMICs. We investigate the extent to which evaluations based on the widely used Kirkpatrick model - focusing on direct outcomes of training, namely reaction of trainees, learning, behaviour change and improvements in programmatic health indicators - align with policy-makers' evidence needs for resource allocation decisions. We use China as a case study where resource allocation decisions about potential scale-up (using domestic funding) are being made about an externally funded pilot HCP training programme.

methodsQualitative data were collected from high-level officials involved in resource allocation at the national and provincial level in China through ten face-to-face, in-depth interviews and two focus group discussions consisting of ten participants each. Data were analysed manually using an interpretive thematic analysis approach.

resultsOur study indicates that Chinese officials not only consider information about the direct outcomes of a training programme, as captured in the Kirkpatrick model, but also need information on the resources required to implement the training, the wider or indirect impacts of training, and the sustainability and scalability to other settings within the country. In addition to considering findings presented in evaluation studies, we found that Chinese policy-makers pay close attention to whether the evaluations were robust and to the composition of the evaluation team.

conclusionsOur qualitative study indicates that training programme evaluations that focus narrowly on direct training outcomes may not provide sufficient information for policy-makers to make decisions on future training programmes. Based on our findings, we have developed an evidence-based framework, which incorporates but expands beyond the Kirkpatrick model, to provide conceptual and practical guidance that aids in the design of training programme evaluations better suited to meet the information needs of policy-makers and to inform policy decisions.

Indexed as

Administrative PersonnelDecision MakingDeveloping CountriesHealth PolicyProgram EvaluationResource AllocationChinaEvaluation Studies as TopicFocus GroupsHealth PersonnelHealth ResourcesHumansPilot ProjectsPolicy MakingQualitative ResearchEvaluationFrameworkHealthcare provider trainingInforming policy decisions

Identifiers

PMID29471840
PMCPMC5824449

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.