Lisa Jaegers1, Ann Marie Dale, Nancy Weaver, Bryan Buchholz, Laura Welch, Bradley Evanoff. 1. Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri; Department of Behavioral Science and Health Education, Saint Louis University College for Public Health and Social Justice, St Louis, Missouri.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intervention studies in participatory ergonomics (PE) are often difficult to interpret due to limited descriptions of program planning and evaluation. METHODS: In an ongoing PE program with floor layers, we developed a logic model to describe our program plan, and process and summative evaluations designed to describe the efficacy of the program. RESULTS: The logic model was a useful tool for describing the program elements and subsequent modifications. The process evaluation measured how well the program was delivered as intended, and revealed the need for program modifications. The summative evaluation provided early measures of the efficacy of the program as delivered. CONCLUSIONS: Inadequate information on program delivery may lead to erroneous conclusions about intervention efficacy due to Type III error. A logic model guided the delivery and evaluation of our intervention and provides useful information to aid interpretation of results.
BACKGROUND: Intervention studies in participatory ergonomics (PE) are often difficult to interpret due to limited descriptions of program planning and evaluation. METHODS: In an ongoing PE program with floor layers, we developed a logic model to describe our program plan, and process and summative evaluations designed to describe the efficacy of the program. RESULTS: The logic model was a useful tool for describing the program elements and subsequent modifications. The process evaluation measured how well the program was delivered as intended, and revealed the need for program modifications. The summative evaluation provided early measures of the efficacy of the program as delivered. CONCLUSIONS: Inadequate information on program delivery may lead to erroneous conclusions about intervention efficacy due to Type III error. A logic model guided the delivery and evaluation of our intervention and provides useful information to aid interpretation of results.
Authors: Karen M Oude Hengel; Birgitte M Blatter; Henk F van der Molen; Catelijne I Joling; Karin I Proper; Paulien M Bongers; Allard J van der Beek Journal: J Occup Environ Med Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 2.162
Authors: Irina Rivilis; Dwayne Van Eerd; Kimberley Cullen; Donald C Cole; Emma Irvin; Jonathan Tyson; Quenby Mahood Journal: Appl Ergon Date: 2007-11-07 Impact factor: 3.661
Authors: Ann Marie Dale; Lisa Jaegers; Laura Welch; Ellen Barnidge; Nancy Weaver; Bradley A Evanoff Journal: Am J Ind Med Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 2.214
Authors: Ann Marie Dale; Lisa Jaegers; Laura Welch; Bethany T Gardner; Bryan Buchholz; Nancy Weaver; Bradley A Evanoff Journal: Am J Ind Med Date: 2016-04-20 Impact factor: 2.214
Authors: Richard I Stein; Jaime R Strickland; Rachel G Tabak; Ann Marie Dale; Graham A Colditz; Bradley A Evanoff Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2019-01-19 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Jaime R Strickland; Anna M Kinghorn; Bradley A Evanoff; Ann Marie Dale Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-02-18 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Charlotte Diana Nørregaard Rasmussen; Ole Henning Sørensen; Allard J van der Beek; Andreas Holtermann Journal: Scand J Work Environ Health Date: 2020-01-16 Impact factor: 5.024