ArticleCanadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique2021
Revisiting the Innovation Strategy performance measurement process: insights from practice.
Article in Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Readiness for scale-up: lessons learned from the Public Health Agency of Canada's Innovation Strategy.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2021Article
- The art and science of a strategic grantmaker: the experience of the Public Health Agency of Canada's Innovation Strategy.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2021Article
- Linking to and addressing the determinants of health: a review of the Innovation Strategy experience.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Performance measurement (PM) aims to ensure transparency and effectiveness in public spending. More specifically, it provides a foundation that allows funders to determine whether an intervention has achieved its stated objective, thus improving understanding of what interventions should be funded in the future. Ideally, performance measurement should help us understand "what works, for whom, and in what context." Unfortunately, more often than not, performance reports are limited to a collection of indicators that make it difficult to answer this question. Based on our work with the Public Health Agency of Canada Innovation Strategy (PHAC-IS), we offer several recommendations to address this issue and support the performance measurement process, especially for complex interventions. We discuss the importance of contextualizing results to better understand impact and associating these results to a well-defined intervention. We also suggest using a validated tool to improve data collection and analysis and critically appraise the methods used to collect impact information. The integration of these key considerations will save time in data analysis and ensure funded recipients are not overburdened by the data collection process. Although this commentary is presented within the context of a complex multi-year population health funding program, we believe our approach can be applied to any performance management process and ultimately improve decisions such as whether an intervention should be continued, scaled up, or adapted to different contexts.
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.