Literature DB >> 33596910

Planning a holistic summative eHealth evaluation in an interdisciplinary and multi-national setting: a case study and propositions for guideline development.

Monika Jurkeviciute1, Amia Enam2,3, Johanna Torres-Bonilla4,5, Henrik Eriksson2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Summative eHealth evaluations frequently lack quality, which affects the generalizability of the evidence, and its use in practice and further research. To guarantee quality, a number of activities are recommended in the guidelines for evaluation planning. This study aimed to examine a case of an eHealth evaluation planning in a multi-national and interdisciplinary setting and to provide recommendations for eHealth evaluation planning guidelines.
METHODS: An empirical eHealth evaluation process was developed through a case study. The empirical process was compared with selected guidelines for eHealth evaluation planning using a pattern-matching technique.
RESULTS: Planning in the interdisciplinary and multi-national team demanded extensive negotiation and alignment to support the future use of the evidence created. The evaluation planning guidelines did not provide specific strategies for different set-ups of the evaluation teams. Further, they did not address important aspects of quality evaluation, such as feasibility analysis of the outcome measures and data collection, monitoring of data quality, and consideration of the methods and measures employed in similar evaluations.
CONCLUSIONS: Activities to prevent quality problems need to be incorporated in the guidelines for evaluation planning. Additionally, evaluators could benefit from guidance in evaluation planning related to the different set-ups of the evaluation teams.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Assessment; Evaluation; Evaluation planning; Evaluation quality; Guidelines; Stakeholder; Standard; eHealth

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33596910      PMCID: PMC7888081          DOI: 10.1186/s12911-021-01399-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak        ISSN: 1472-6947            Impact factor:   2.796


  22 in total

Review 1.  Future directions in evaluation research: people, organizational, and social issues.

Authors:  B Kaplan; N T Shaw
Journal:  Methods Inf Med       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 2.176

Review 2.  The quality of evidence in health informatics: how did the quality of healthcare IT evaluation publications develop from 1982 to 2005?

Authors:  N F de Keizer; E Ammenwerth
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  2007-01-05       Impact factor: 4.046

3.  Evaluating healthcare information technology outside of academia: observations from the national resource center for healthcare information technology at the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Authors:  Eric G Poon; Caitlin M Cusack; Julie J McGowan
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2009-06-30       Impact factor: 4.497

4.  Establishing guidelines for executing and reporting Internet intervention research.

Authors:  Judith Proudfoot; Britt Klein; Azy Barak; Per Carlbring; Pim Cuijpers; Alfred Lange; Lee Ritterband; Gerhard Andersson
Journal:  Cogn Behav Ther       Date:  2011

5.  Technology assessment and the sociopolitics of health technologies.

Authors:  P Lehoux; S Blume
Journal:  J Health Polit Policy Law       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 2.265

Review 6.  Evaluating informatics applications--some alternative approaches: theory, social interactionism, and call for methodological pluralism.

Authors:  B Kaplan
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 4.046

7.  Why do evaluations of eHealth programs fail? An alternative set of guiding principles.

Authors:  Trisha Greenhalgh; Jill Russell
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2010-11-02       Impact factor: 11.069

8.  e-Health: a position statement of the European Society of Cardiology.

Authors:  Martin R Cowie; Jeroen Bax; Nico Bruining; John G F Cleland; Friedrich Koehler; Marek Malik; Fausto Pinto; Enno van der Velde; Panos Vardas
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2015-08-24       Impact factor: 29.983

9.  Unmet Need: Improving mHealth Evaluation Rigor to Build the Evidence Base.

Authors:  Sangeeta Mookherji; Garrett Mehl; Nadi Kaonga; Patricia Mechael
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2015-06-04

10.  Evaluating eHealth interventions: the need for continuous systemic evaluation.

Authors:  Lorraine Catwell; Aziz Sheikh
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2009-08-18       Impact factor: 11.069

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.