ArticleBMC public health2025
Priority indicators for evaluating the impact of field epidemiology training programs - results of a global modified Delphi study.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Indicators for palliative care integration in primary health care: how expert profile shapes consensus in a modified Delphi study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Building epidemiological capacity to strengthen health systems: evaluating the advanced (extended) field epidemiology training program of Papua New Guinea.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Strengthening field epidemiology capacity in Canada: a mixed-methods evaluation of the Canadian field epidemiology program.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Strengthening Outbreak Detection in Africa to Achieve the 7-1-7 Global Framework: Challenges and Opportunities.Public health reviews · 2025Review
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
backgroundField Epidemiology Training Programs (FETPs) aim to develop a skilled public health workforce through applied competency-based learning. With 98 programs globally and over 20,000 graduates, these programs play a crucial role in disease preparedness and response activities around the world. Despite their importance, there have been few published evaluations. This paper presents the results of a consensus-building process to develop a preferred array of indicators for evaluating the outputs, outcomes, and impacts of FETPs.
methodsWe conducted a modified Delphi study to reach consensus on preferred evaluation indicators for FETPs. An initial list of evaluation indicators were identified from literature reviews and consultations with impact evaluation experts and FETP professionals. A modified Delphi process was subsequently employed, involving two rounds of surveys and a final expert review meeting, to reach consensus on indicators. The Delphi panel included 23 experts representing diverse global regions and FETP roles.
resultsConsensus was reached to include 134 evaluation indicators in the final impact evaluation framework. These indicators were grouped as output, outcome, and impact indicators.
conclusionsThis study presents the first FETP impact evaluation framework with a comprehensive list of evaluation indicators for FETPs. This list of indicators is intended as a resource to promote and enhance the evaluation of FETPs and thus improve these important training programs which aim to strengthen national, regional and global health security.
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.