Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34702257›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2021

Study protocol for an evaluability assessment of an anti-human trafficking program.

Christopher J Wretman, Rebecca J Macy, Amanda M Stylianou, Anita S Teekah, Elizabeth N Ebright, Jeongsuk Kim, Jia Luo, Cynthia Fraga Rizo

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 73% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Christopher J WretmanThe Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 725 M.L.K. Jr Blvd., Chapel Hill, NC, 27516, USA. wretman@live.unc.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-5221-1665
Rebecca J MacySchool of Social Work, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 325 Pittsboro Street CB #3550, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Amanda M StylianouEasterseals New Jersey, East Brunswick, NJ, USA.
Anita S TeekahSafe Horizon, New York City, NY, USA.
Elizabeth N EbrightSafe Horizon, New York City, NY, USA.
Jeongsuk KimSchool of Social Work, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 325 Pittsboro Street CB #3550, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Jia LuoSchool of Social Work, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 325 Pittsboro Street CB #3550, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Cynthia Fraga RizoSchool of Social Work, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 325 Pittsboro Street CB #3550, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USSafe Horizon · USEasterseals · US

Funding

National Institute of Justice #2019-VT-BX-0039
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHuman trafficking is a serious global challenge associated with a complex array of health inequities for individuals, families, and communities. Consequently, in addition to a conventional criminal justice approach, anti-trafficking scholars have increasingly called for a public health approach to address this global challenge. Such calls have emphasized that a comprehensive, robust, and social justice-informed public health strategy for anti-trafficking must include services to facilitate survivors' HT exit and recovery, and to prevent their re-victimization. Fortunately, many community-based organizations and non-governmental organizations worldwide have heeded these calls and developed anti-trafficking programs for survivors. Unfortunately, despite the growing numbers of organizations providing anti-trafficking services, research concerning these programs' effectiveness remains nascent overall, and even more scant when filtered through an equity focus.

methodsTo advance the field by developing guidance concerning how best to evaluate anti-human trafficking programs, an ongoing research project aims to conduct a mixed methods evaluability assessment of a prominent anti-trafficking program using a social justice framework. Guided by well-established evaluability assessment frameworks, the study activities include four sequential steps: (a) focusing the assessment, (b) developing the program theory and logic, (c) gathering feedback, and (d) applying the assessment findings. Activities will include qualitative interviews and focus groups, observations, and quantitative analysis of program data among others. Human subjects and ethical review for the evaluability assessment has been granted by the Office of Human Subjects Research at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. DISCUSSION: Once completed, evaluability assessment results will provide evidence and products that have the potential to guide both evaluation research and service provision not only for the specific organization under study, but also for other anti-human trafficking programs worldwide. Findings will be developed into a variety of dissemination products tailored for both practice professionals and researchers. In the interim, this protocol manuscript offers research strategies and recommendations that can help inform the development of other studies in the developing field of anti-trafficking program evaluation research.

Indexed as

OrganizationsPublic HealthFinancing, OrganizedFocus GroupsHumansProgram EvaluationEvaluability assessmentGlobal healthHuman traffickingStudy protocol

Identifiers

PMID34702257
PMCPMC8547574
OpenAlexW3209941046

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.