scholarly journals Evaluation of European Domestic Violence Perpetrator Programmes: Toward a Model for Designing and Reporting Evaluations Related to Perpetrator Treatment Interventions

2016 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 868-884 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah-Jane Lilley-Walker ◽  
Marianne Hester ◽  
William Turner
Keyword(s):  
Domestic Violence ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Impact Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation Studies ◽  
Evaluation Methodology ◽  
Detailed Knowledge ◽  
Input Output ◽  
Treatment Interventions ◽  
Time Points ◽  
The Impact

This article is based on a review of 60 evaluations (published and unpublished) relating to European domestic violence perpetrator programmes, involving 7,212 programme participants across 12 countries. The purpose of the review, part of the “IMPACT: Evaluation of European Perpetrator Programmes” project funded by the European Commission (Daphne III Programme), was to provide detailed knowledge about the range of European evaluation studies with particular emphasis on the design, methods, input, output, and outcome measures used in order to identify the possibilities and challenges of a multicountry, Europe-wide evaluation methodology that could be used to assess perpetrator programmes in the future. We provide a model to standardise the reporting of evaluation studies and to ensure attention is paid to what information is being collected at different time points so as to understand what and how the behaviour and attitudes of perpetrators might change throughout the course of the programme.

The Impact of the Public Expenditure Cuts Policy on the Labor Market in Vietnam

2012 ◽  
pp. 22-46
Author(s):  
Huong Nguyen Thi Lan ◽  
Toan Pham Ngoc
Keyword(s):  
Labor Market ◽  
Computable General Equilibrium ◽  
Impact Evaluation ◽  
Public Expenditure ◽  
Computable General Equilibrium Model ◽  
Living Standard ◽  
Input Output ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Impact

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of public expenditure cuts on employment and income to support policies for the development of the labor mar- ket. Impact evaluation is of interest for policy makers as well as researchers. This paper presents a method – that is based on a Computable General Equilibrium model – to analyse the impact of the public expenditure cuts policy on employment and income in industries and occupations in Vietnam using macro data, the Input output table, 2006, 2008 and the 2010 Vietnam Household Living Standard Survey.

scholarly journals Quantitative methods used to evaluate impact of health promotion interventions to prevent HIV infections: a methodological systematic review protocol

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrainolo Ravalihasy ◽  
Lidia Kardas-Sloma ◽  
Yazdan Yazdanpanah ◽  
Valéry Ridde
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Promotion ◽  
Impact Evaluation ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Evaluation Studies ◽  
Complex Interventions ◽  
Hiv Infections ◽  
Combination Prevention ◽  
Health Promotion Interventions ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Combination prevention is currently considered the best approach to combat HIV epidemic. It is based upon the combination of structural, behavioral and biomedical interventions. Such interventions are frequently implemented in a health promoting manner due to their aims, the approach that was adopted and their complexity. The impact evaluation of these interventions often relies on methods inherited from the biomedical field. However, these methods have limitations and should be adapted to be relevant for these complex interventions. This systematic review aims to map the evidence-based methods used to quantify the impact of these interventions and analyze how these methods are implemented. Methods Three databases (Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed) will be used to identify impact evaluation studies of health promotion interventions that aimed at reducing the incidence or prevalence of HIV infection. Only studies based on quantitative design assessing intervention impact on HIV prevalence or incidence will be included. Two reviewers will independently screen studies based on titles and abstracts and then on the full text. The information about study characteristics will be extracted to understand the context in which the interventions are implemented. The information specific to quantitative methods of impact evaluation will be extracted using items from the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), the guidelines for reporting Statistical Analyses and Methods in the Published Literature (SAMPL) and the guidelines for Strengthening The Reporting of Empirical Simulation Studies (STRESS). This review will be conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Discussion The impact evaluation of HIV prevention interventions is a matter of substantial importance given the growing need for evidence of the effectiveness of these interventions whereas they are increasingly complex. These evaluations allow to identify the most effective strategies to be implemented to fight the epidemic. It is therefore relevant to map the methods to better implement them and adapt them according to the type of intervention to be evaluated. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42020210825

scholarly journals Evaluating the impact of agricultural extension programmes in sub-Saharan Africa: Challenges and prospects

2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hailemichael Taye
Keyword(s):  
Impact Evaluation ◽  
Agricultural Development ◽  
Agricultural Research ◽  
Evaluation Studies ◽  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
Agricultural Extension ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Sub Saharan ◽  
The Impact

Background: In sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), impact evaluation has been used to assess whether agricultural extension interventions have brought the intended result or to establish causal linkages between interventions and outcomes. However, there is some scepticism about the validity and reliability of the results of the impact evaluation reports due to some contradictory and exaggerated results.Objectives: This article analyses some impact evaluation studies conducted in SSA as to why contradictions and exaggerations are manifested in some reports and what would be the future prospects of impact evaluation of agricultural extension programmes in the region.Methods: Impact evaluation reports and results of agricultural extension programmes from 10 SSA countries were reviewed and analysed based on impact evaluation principles and theories.Results: The results show that most of the evaluations reported positive impacts. There are also conflicting reports on extension performance. The fact that the overwhelming majority of impact evaluation reports claim positive extension impacts is not in line with the reports on agricultural productivity growth in the region. There are various reasons for over estimated impacts and contradictory results, which include use of poor impact evaluation methodologies, lack of reliable data and insufficient capacity to conduct rigorous impact evaluations.Conclusion: Due to these challenges and the shift in agricultural research and extension approaches, it is recommended that rather than investing effort in trying to prove impact, greater attention should be given to improving impact as well as using other innovative monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and learning tools that consider the dynamic nature of agricultural development.

scholarly journals LEGAL REGULATIONS REGARDING THE IMPACT EVALUATION METHODOLOGY OF STRUCTURAL AND COHESION FUNDS

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 89-94
Author(s):  
Felix-Angel Popescu
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Impact Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation Methodology ◽  
Legal Regulations ◽  
Ex Post ◽  
State Economy ◽  
Ex Ante ◽  
Legislative Framework ◽  
Urban Rural ◽  
The Impact

Establishing a legislative framework for addressing an appropriate methodology for assessing the impact of Structural and Cohesion funds, in all 3 evaluation phases (ex-ante, intermediate and ex-post), is necessary both for users of these funds (the resort ministry, the intermediary bodies, the final beneficiaries – from an EU Member State) as well as for researchers on this topic. The stage of the knowledge in the field of the impact of these funds on each EU Member State economy narrows when the effects of the implementation of projects at regional, county and urban - rural level are discussed.

scholarly journals The impact of arrest and seizure on drug crime and harms: A systematic review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Eggins ◽  
Lorelei Hine
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Impact Evaluation ◽  
Drug Price ◽  
Evaluation Studies ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Drug Crime ◽  
Drug Purity ◽  
The Impact

Drawing on the Global Policing Database (GPD), this review assesses the impact of supplier arrests and seizures on drug crime, drug use, drug price, drug purity, and drug harm outcomes. Just 13 impact evaluation studies (reported in 18 documents) met inclusion criteria. An evidence and gap map was constructed, showing that research to date relates primarily to drug harms, followed by drug crime and drug price, and that there are significant gaps in the impact evaluation literature. The results of this review demonstrate the limited amount of high-quality scientific evidence that can be used to examine the impact of supplier arrest and seizure on a range of drug-related outcomes.

scholarly journals Problems with evidence assessment in COVID-19 health policy impact evaluation: a systematic review of study design and evidence strength

BMJ Open ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. e053820
Author(s):  
Noah A Haber ◽  
Emma Clarke-Deelder ◽  
Avi Feller ◽  
Emily R Smith ◽  
Joshua A. Salomon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Policy ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Impact Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation Studies ◽  
Policy Impact ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Evidence Strength ◽  
Quantitative Impact ◽  
The Impact

IntroductionAssessing the impact of COVID-19 policy is critical for informing future policies. However, there are concerns about the overall strength of COVID-19 impact evaluation studies given the circumstances for evaluation and concerns about the publication environment.MethodsWe included studies that were primarily designed to estimate the quantitative impact of one or more implemented COVID-19 policies on direct SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 outcomes. After searching PubMed for peer-reviewed articles published on 26 November 2020 or earlier and screening, all studies were reviewed by three reviewers first independently and then to consensus. The review tool was based on previously developed and released review guidance for COVID-19 policy impact evaluation.ResultsAfter 102 articles were identified as potentially meeting inclusion criteria, we identified 36 published articles that evaluated the quantitative impact of COVID-19 policies on direct COVID-19 outcomes. Nine studies were set aside because the study design was considered inappropriate for COVID-19 policy impact evaluation (n=8 pre/post; n=1 cross-sectional), and 27 articles were given a full consensus assessment. 20/27 met criteria for graphical display of data, 5/27 for functional form, 19/27 for timing between policy implementation and impact, and only 3/27 for concurrent changes to the outcomes. Only 4/27 were rated as overall appropriate. Including the 9 studies set aside, reviewers found that only four of the 36 identified published and peer-reviewed health policy impact evaluation studies passed a set of key design checks for identifying the causal impact of policies on COVID-19 outcomes.DiscussionThe reviewed literature directly evaluating the impact of COVID-19 policies largely failed to meet key design criteria for inference of sufficient rigour to be actionable by policy-makers. More reliable evidence review is needed to both identify and produce policy-actionable evidence, alongside the recognition that actionable evidence is often unlikely to be feasible.

scholarly journals Problems with Evidence Assessment in COVID-19 Health Policy Impact Evaluation (PEACHPIE): A systematic review of evidence strength

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noah A. Haber ◽  
Emma Clarke-Deelder ◽  
Avi Feller ◽  
Emily R. Smith ◽  
Joshua Salomon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Policy ◽  
Impact Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Functional Form ◽  
Evaluation Studies ◽  
Policy Impact ◽  
Graphical Display ◽  
Evidence Strength ◽  
Quantitative Impact ◽  
The Impact

AbstractIntroductionAssessing the impact of COVID-19 policy is critical for informing future policies. However, there are concerns about the overall strength of COVID-19 impact evaluation studies given the circumstances for evaluation and concerns about the publication environment. This study systematically reviewed the strength of evidence in the published COVID-19 policy impact evaluation literature.MethodsWe included studies that were primarily designed to estimate the quantitative impact of one or more implemented COVID-19 policies on direct SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 outcomes. After searching PubMed for peer-reviewed articles published on November 26 or earlier and screening, all studies were reviewed by three reviewers first independently and then to consensus. The review tool was based on previously developed and release review guidance for COVID-19 policy impact evaluation, assessing what impact evaluation method was used, graphical display of outcomes data, functional form for the outcomes, timing between policy and impact, concurrent changes to the outcomes, and an overall rating.ResultsAfter 102 articles were identified as potentially meeting inclusion criteria, we identified 36 published articles that evaluated the quantitative impact of COVID-19 policies on direct COVID-19 outcomes. The majority (n=23/36) of studies in our sample examined the impact of stay-at-home requirements. Nine studies were set aside because the study design was considered inappropriate for COVID-19 policy impact evaluation (n=8 pre/post; n=1 cross-section), and 27 articles were given a full consensus assessment. 20/27 met criteria for graphical display of data, 5/27 for functional form, 19/27 for timing between policy implementation and impact, and only 3/27 for concurrent changes to the outcomes. Only 1/27 studies passed all of the above checks, and 4/27 were rated as overall appropriate. Including the 9 studies set aside, reviewers found that only four of the 36 identified published and peer-reviewed health policy impact evaluation studies passed a set of key design checks for identifying the causal impact of policies on COVID-19 outcomes.DiscussionThe reviewed literature directly evaluating the impact of COVID-19 policies largely failed to meet key design criteria for useful inference. This was largely driven by the circumstances under which policies were passed making it difficult to attribute changes in COVID-19 outcomes to particular policies. More reliable evidence review is needed to both identify and produce policy-actionable evidence, alongside the recognition that actionable evidence is often unlikely to be feasible.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document