健康教育计划之评估:当前评估与未来方向。

B A Israel, K M Cummings, M B Dignan, C A Heaney, D P Perales, B G Simons-Morton, M A Zimmerman
{"title":"健康教育计划之评估:当前评估与未来方向。","authors":"B A Israel,&nbsp;K M Cummings,&nbsp;M B Dignan,&nbsp;C A Heaney,&nbsp;D P Perales,&nbsp;B G Simons-Morton,&nbsp;M A Zimmerman","doi":"10.1177/109019819402200308","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recently there has been an increase in the different types of strategies used in health education interventions, including an emphasis on broadening programs focused on individual behavior change to include larger units of practice. There has also been an increasing critique of the traditional physical science paradigm for evaluating the multiple dimensions inherent in many interventions. Additionally, there is a growing recognition of the importance of involving multiple stakeholders in designing, implementing, and evaluating interventions. Each of these factors carries specific evaluation challenges. With the overall aim of strengthening the evaluation of health education programs, this article aims to (a) present conceptual and technical design issues and options, (b) describe different approaches to evaluation, (c) highlight evaluation approaches that have been effective, (d) critique the limitations of traditional evaluation approaches, (e) examine promising approaches and implications for future evaluations, and (f) provide recommendations for evaluation designs, data collection methods, roles, responsibilities, and principles for evaluating interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":77155,"journal":{"name":"Health education quarterly","volume":"22 3","pages":"364-89"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1995-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/109019819402200308","citationCount":"161","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of health education programs: current assessment and future directions.\",\"authors\":\"B A Israel,&nbsp;K M Cummings,&nbsp;M B Dignan,&nbsp;C A Heaney,&nbsp;D P Perales,&nbsp;B G Simons-Morton,&nbsp;M A Zimmerman\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/109019819402200308\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Recently there has been an increase in the different types of strategies used in health education interventions, including an emphasis on broadening programs focused on individual behavior change to include larger units of practice. There has also been an increasing critique of the traditional physical science paradigm for evaluating the multiple dimensions inherent in many interventions. Additionally, there is a growing recognition of the importance of involving multiple stakeholders in designing, implementing, and evaluating interventions. Each of these factors carries specific evaluation challenges. With the overall aim of strengthening the evaluation of health education programs, this article aims to (a) present conceptual and technical design issues and options, (b) describe different approaches to evaluation, (c) highlight evaluation approaches that have been effective, (d) critique the limitations of traditional evaluation approaches, (e) examine promising approaches and implications for future evaluations, and (f) provide recommendations for evaluation designs, data collection methods, roles, responsibilities, and principles for evaluating interventions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":77155,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health education quarterly\",\"volume\":\"22 3\",\"pages\":\"364-89\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1995-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/109019819402200308\",\"citationCount\":\"161\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health education quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/109019819402200308\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health education quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/109019819402200308","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 161

摘要

最近,在健康教育干预中使用的不同类型的策略有所增加,包括强调扩大关注个人行为改变的计划,以包括更大的实践单位。对于评估许多干预措施中固有的多维度的传统物理科学范式,也有越来越多的批评。此外,越来越多的人认识到让多个利益相关者参与设计、实施和评估干预措施的重要性。这些因素中的每一个都带来了具体的评估挑战。为了加强健康教育计划的评估,本文旨在(a)提出概念和技术设计问题和选择,(b)描述不同的评估方法,(c)强调有效的评估方法,(d)批评传统评估方法的局限性,(e)研究有前途的方法和对未来评估的影响,以及(f)为评估设计提供建议。数据收集方法、作用、责任和评估干预措施的原则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluation of health education programs: current assessment and future directions.

Recently there has been an increase in the different types of strategies used in health education interventions, including an emphasis on broadening programs focused on individual behavior change to include larger units of practice. There has also been an increasing critique of the traditional physical science paradigm for evaluating the multiple dimensions inherent in many interventions. Additionally, there is a growing recognition of the importance of involving multiple stakeholders in designing, implementing, and evaluating interventions. Each of these factors carries specific evaluation challenges. With the overall aim of strengthening the evaluation of health education programs, this article aims to (a) present conceptual and technical design issues and options, (b) describe different approaches to evaluation, (c) highlight evaluation approaches that have been effective, (d) critique the limitations of traditional evaluation approaches, (e) examine promising approaches and implications for future evaluations, and (f) provide recommendations for evaluation designs, data collection methods, roles, responsibilities, and principles for evaluating interventions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Usefulness of multiple equations for predicting preventive oral health behaviors. Using the theory of reasoned action (TRA) to understand the decision to use condoms in an STD clinic population. Adolescent sexual health. Program: N'go Doo Dee Family Support Initiative. Program: Responsible Alcohol and Tobacco Sales Training (RATS).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1