Literature DB >> 28028011

A research and evaluation capacity building model in Western Australia.

Roanna Lobo1, Gemma Crawford1, Jonathan Hallett1, Sue Laing2, Donna B Mak2,3, Jonine Jancey1, Sally Rowell4, Kahlia McCausland1, Lisa Bastian2, Anne Sorenson5, P J Matt Tilley1, Simon Yam6, Jude Comfort1, Sean Brennan2, Maryanne Doherty1.   

Abstract

Evaluation of public health programs, services and policies is increasingly required to demonstrate effectiveness. Funding constraints necessitate that existing programs, services and policies be evaluated and their findings disseminated. Evidence-informed practice and policy is also desirable to maximise investments in public health. Partnerships between public health researchers, service providers and policymakers can help address evaluation knowledge and skills gaps. The Western Australian Sexual Health and Blood-borne Virus Applied Research and Evaluation Network (SiREN) aims to build research and evaluation capacity in the sexual health and blood-borne virus sector in Western Australia (WA). Partners' perspectives of the SiREN model after 2 years were explored. Qualitative written responses from service providers, policymakers and researchers about the SiREN model were analysed thematically. Service providers reported that participation in SiREN prompted them to consider evaluation earlier in the planning process and increased their appreciation of the value of evaluation. Policymakers noted benefits of the model in generating local evidence and highlighting local issues of importance for consideration at a national level. Researchers identified challenges communicating the services available through SiREN and the time investment needed to develop effective collaborative partnerships. Stronger engagement between public health researchers, service providers and policymakers through collaborative partnerships has the potential to improve evidence generation and evidence translation. These outcomes require long-term funding and commitment from all partners to develop and maintain partnerships. Ongoing monitoring and evaluation can ensure the partnership remains responsive to the needs of key stakeholders. The findings are applicable to many sectors.

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 28028011     DOI: 10.1093/heapro/daw088

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Promot Int        ISSN: 0957-4824            Impact factor:   2.483


  5 in total

1.  The Funding, Administrative, and Policy Influences on the Evaluation of Primary Prevention Programs in Australia.

Authors:  J Schwarzman; A Bauman; B J Gabbe; C Rissel; T Shilton; B J Smith
Journal:  Prev Sci       Date:  2019-08

2.  Utilizing Causal Loop Diagramming to Explore a Research and Evaluation Capacity Building Partnership.

Authors:  Rochelle Tobin; Gemma Crawford; Jonathan Hallett; Bruce Maycock; Roanna Lobo
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2022-05-31

3.  Trends in the Authorship of Peer Reviewed Publications in the Urology Literature.

Authors:  Julie Y An; Joseph A Baiocco; Soroush Rais-Bahrami
Journal:  Urol Pract       Date:  2018-05

4.  Critical factors that affect the functioning of a research and evaluation capacity building partnership: A causal loop diagram.

Authors:  Rochelle Tobin; Gemma Crawford; Jonathan Hallett; Bruce Richard Maycock; Roanna Lobo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Taking a systems approach to explore the impacts and outcomes of a research and evaluation capacity building partnership: a protocol.

Authors:  Rochelle Tobin; Jonathan Hallett; Roanna Lobo; Bruce Richard Maycock
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-09-20       Impact factor: 2.692

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.