ArticleGlobal health action2022
Strengthening effectiveness evaluations to improve programs for women, children and adolescents.
Article in Global health action, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perceptions of healthcare professionals of the application of the National Program for Women and Child Health in Bacău County, Romania: a cross-sectional study.Medicine and pharmacy reports · 2026Article
- Evaluating global health programmes targeting under-5 mortality: problems and recommendations.BMJ global health · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a comprehensive maternal newborn health intervention in rural Tanzania: single-arm pre-post coverage survey results.Global health action · 2022Article
- The RADAR coverage tool: developing a toolkit for rigorous household surveys for reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health & nutrition indicators.Global health action · 2022Article
- The role of modeling in evaluation of maternal and child health programs: using the lives saved tool to help answer core evaluation questions.Global health action · 2022Article
- Measuring Quality of Maternal, Neonatal, Child, Reproductive Health and Nutrition Care with tools developed by the RADAR project and tested in Sub Saharan Africa.Global health action · 2022Article
- There is no right time for accountability for women's, children's and adolescents' health.Global health action · 2022Article
- Strengthening effectiveness evaluations through gender integration to improve programs for women, newborn, child, and adolescent health.Global health action · 2022Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A full understanding of the pathways from efficacious interventions to population impact requires rigorous effectiveness evaluations conducted under realistic scale-up conditions at country level. In this paper, we introduce a deductive framework that underpins effectiveness evaluations. This framework forms the theoretical and conceptual basis for the 'Real Accountability: Data Analysis for Results' (RADAR) project, intended to address gaps in guidance and tools for the evaluation of projects being implemented at scale to reduce mortality among women and children. These gaps include needs for a framework to guide decisions about evaluations and practical measurement tools, as well as increased capacity in evaluation practice among donors and program planners at global, national and project levels. RADAR aimed to improve the evidence base for program and policy decisions in reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health and nutrition (RMNCH&N). We focus on five linked methodological steps - presented as core evaluation questions - for designing and implementing effectiveness evaluation of large-scale programs that support both the needs of program managers to improve their programs and the needs of donors to meet their accountability responsibilities. RADAR has operationalized each step with a tool to facilitate its application. We also describe cross-cutting methodological issues and broader contextual factors that affect the planning and implementation of such evaluations. We conclude with proposals for how the global RMNCH&N community can support rigorous program evaluations and make better use of the resulting evidence.
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.