Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40229778›Full record

ArticleHuman resources for health2025

Development of an impact evaluation framework and planning tool for field epidemiology training programs.

James A Flint, Michelle Jack, David Jack, Rachel Hammersley-Mather, David N Durrheim, Martyn D Kirk, Tambri Housen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human resources for health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

7 authors.

James A FlintThe University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia. james.flint@newcastle.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-5525-1785
Michelle JackThe University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
David JackSocial Impact Story, Casuarina, Australia.
Rachel Hammersley-MatherThe University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia.
David N DurrheimThe University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia.
Martyn D KirkAustralian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Tambri HousenThe University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia.

Funding

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Australian Government 75993
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the growth and diversification of Field Epidemiology Training Programs (FETPs) globally, there are few published evaluations. Those that have been published largely focus on program processes and outputs, with some including short-medium-term outcomes and very few focusing on sustained impact. This paper describes the process of developing an FETP impact evaluation framework and FETP impact evaluation planning tool to facilitate FETP impact evaluations. The impact framework was developed to be simple, flexible and efficient.

methodsA theory of change process for an FETP in Papua New Guinea formed the basis of the impact evaluation framework. With support from independent impact evaluation experts, the framework was developed using an iterative approach. A review of the literature and technical input from FETP representatives underpinned its development. A simple planning tool was developed to help operationalise the impact framework.

resultsThe final FETP impact evaluation framework consists of a high-level summary framework and a detailed operational framework. The high-level framework follows the flow of outputs, outcomes and impacts for trainees, graduates, the public health systems, and communities. The detailed FETP Impact Evaluation Framework includes activities, enablers and barriers, and output, outcome and impact indicators. The FETP Impact Evaluation Planning Tool consists of five steps using a theory-based approach.

conclusionsThe long history and global growth of the FETP model suggest success and imply impact, yet few published papers provide necessary backing evidence. There is growing interest across the FETP community and funders to understand the longer-term changes that FETPs contribute to. We developed an impact framework and planning tool specifically designed to support FETP impact evaluation. The framework and tool are intended to be used by FETP staff with no prior evaluation experience. The evaluation approach is intentionally flexible, allowing contextual application and integration with established quantitative and qualitative evaluation methods.

Indexed as

EpidemiologyProgram EvaluationPublic HealthHumansPapua New GuineaProgram DevelopmentEvaluation frameworkFETPField epidemiology trainingImpact evaluation

Identifiers

PMID40229778
PMCPMC11995554

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.