Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
External Evaluator (external + evaluator)
Selected AbstractsPathways to prevention: A training and technical assistance initiative to increase program capacity to address infant mental health issues in Early Head StartINFANT MENTAL HEALTH JOURNAL, Issue 2 2007Tammy L. Mann This article provides an overview of a training and consultation program aimed at enhancing the capacity of Early Head Start (EHS) and Migrant and Seasonal Head Start (MSHS) programs to address infant mental health issues from a promotion, prevention, and treatment perspective. This program was implemented by the Early Head Start National Resource Center (EHS NRC), operated by ZERO TO THREE. The EHS NRC is funded by the Head Start Bureau to provide a diverse array of training and technical assistance support services to Early Head Start programs throughout the country. In the fall of 2001, ZERO TO THREE was funded to design and implement the Pathways Initiative. While ZERO TO THREE was not funded to test the efficacy of the Pathways Initiative as a research intervention similar to other papers described in this special issue, we worked creatively to identify resources that allowed us to engage an external evaluator to look at both process and outcome measures. This paper describes the consultation program, evaluation activities, and key lessons learned. [source] Diabetic persons with foot ulcers and their perceptions of hyperbaric oxygen chamber therapyJOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, Issue 14 2009Hjelm Katarina Aim., To elucidate how diabetic patients with limb-threatening foot lesions perceive and evaluate content and organisation of treatment in a multi-place hyperbaric oxygen chamber. Background., To our knowledge there are no patients' evaluations of diabetes care in a high-technology area like the hyperbaric oxygen chamber. The burden on persons with diabetic foot complications might be increased if adjuvant therapy with hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) within a locked airtight vessel is given. Design., Explorative study. Participants., Participants were included in the HODFU study, a prospective randomised double-blind study, designed to evaluate whether HBOT heals more chronic foot ulcers than placebo treatment with hyperbaric air. Six females and 13 males, aged 44,83 years (median 70), with diabetic foot ulcers, participated. Method., Focus-group interviews by an external evaluator. Results., Management was perceived as well-functioning with competent staff delivering quick treatment in a positive manner and in good co-operation. HBOT sessions, in groups, were described as unproblematic and pleasant, through sharing experiences with others, although time-consuming and tiring. Recognising the responsible physician and communication with other physicians in the health-care chain was perceived as problematic. Placebo treatment, when given, did not reveal any problems; many perceived HBOT as the last resort and respondents had a negative view of future health and expressed fears of new wounds and amputation. Conclusions and relevance to clinical practice., From patients' perspective HBOT in the delivered health-care model was perceived as well-functioning, taking into consideration both technical and relational aspects of care in this high-technology environment. Communication with the patient and between different care givers, with a consistent message given and information about who is responsible and to whom one should turn, wherever treated, is the most crucial aspect of the model. Future fears need to be recognised and group interaction can be encouraged to share the burden of disease. [source] Participatory evaluation (II) , translating concepts of reliability and validity in fieldworkCHILD: CARE, HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENT, Issue 3 2007B. Crishna Abstract Background In developing countries participatory methods are a viable way of evaluating social development projects. It provides a means to look constructively at the strengths and weaknesses in projects, and use the lessons learned to improve planning and implementation. One of the challenges faced, however, is being able to ensure that the study is sound, reliable and valid, and that it is free from bias, thus making the final results trustworthy and of use to a larger population. Methods This article looks at five steps involved in a participatory evaluation process and the ways in which reliability and validity have been considered. Results Participatory studies may be different, but all have similar underlying principles as traditional quantitative and qualitative studies. Examples from fieldwork in Asia have been used to demonstrate how studies can be made credible, so that they have value, influence or the ability to encourage changes in thinking, while evaluating social development projects. At every stage, the role of the external evaluator remains crucial, and has to be that of a facilitator, encouraging participation from everyone. Conclusion Hence project evaluations using such a method must be clear in how to remove bias and ensure reliability and validity in all the stages of the evaluation, from planning to making recommendations. Imaginative and alternative strategies need to be developed to examine reliability and validity in the qualitative evaluation. [source] Interdisciplinary collaboration and academic work: A case study of a university-community partnershipNEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING & LEARNING, Issue 102 2005Marilyn J. Amey The authors propose a model of the stages of interdisciplinary collaboration grounded in their experiences as external evaluators of a university-community partnership. [source] | ||||||||||