Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41409697›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in public health2025

Measuring delivery and impact in community-based health promotion initiatives: development and overview of the Healthway Evaluation Framework.

Aaron Simpson, Ben Jackson, Michael Rosenberg, Claire Willis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Aaron SimpsonSchool of Human Sciences (Exercise and Sport Science), The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.
Ben JacksonSchool of Human Sciences (Exercise and Sport Science), The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.
Michael RosenbergSchool of Human Sciences (Exercise and Sport Science), The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.
Claire WillisSchool of Human Sciences (Exercise and Sport Science), The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Robust evaluation is critical for understanding and enhancing the impact of health promotion initiatives. However, many community-based organisations face challenges in planning and conducting evaluation due to limitations in knowledge, resources, and the applicability of existing evaluation frameworks. The Healthway Evaluation Framework, and its accompanying practical Measurement Toolkit, was designed to support evaluation planning, implementation, and reporting across diverse health promotion programs and settings. Methods and results: Drawing on an evidence review and extensive consultation with community organisations and health promotion funders, the Framework consists of four pillars: (i) Activity; (ii) Knowledge, Attitude, Behaviour; (iii) Organisational; and (iv) Sustainability. Each pillar includes clearly defined elements to guide the evaluation of both delivery processes and health and organisational outcomes. A Measurement Toolkit accompanies the Evaluation Framework, providing practical guidance for data collection in health promotion evaluation. Conclusion: The Healthway Evaluation Framework provides a practical and adaptable solution for advancing evaluation practice, enhancing the consistency of reporting, and strengthening the evidence base for health promotion.

Indexed as

Health PromotionProgram EvaluationHumanscapacity buildingcommunity healthevaluation framework designhealth promotion evaluationpublic health

Identifiers

PMID41409697
PMCPMC12705574

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.