Strengthening evaluation to capture the breadth of public health practice: ideal vs. real
In a context of a limited, albeit growing evidence base for public health initiatives, the need for evaluation of public health practice remains crucial. However, the most rigorous evidence available to inform public health policy and interventions, in particular from systematic reviews, is often do...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of public health (Oxford, England) England), 2012-03, Vol.34 (1), p.151-155 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 155 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 151 |
| container_title | Journal of public health (Oxford, England) |
| container_volume | 34 |
| creator | Pettman, Tahna L. Armstrong, Rebecca Doyle, Jodie Burford, Belinda Anderson, Laurie M. Hillgrove, Tessa Honey, Nikki Waters, Elizabeth |
| description | In a context of a limited, albeit growing evidence base for public health initiatives, the need for evaluation of public health practice remains crucial. However, the most rigorous evidence available to inform public health policy and interventions, in particular from systematic reviews, is often dominated by relatively large, tightly controlled intervention trials conducted by universities and other research organizations. Such research evidence tends to raise questions regarding the applicability and transferability of research to 'real world' practice. Adapted from the source document. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1093/pubmed/fds014 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_923576496</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>45158570</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>45158570</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c347t-3c8f0ab40040bf4d38fdf62a374a1914d34e84b6ce2a8a21a5586540593c86883</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp90DtPwzAUBWALgWgpjIwgb7Ck9Ts2G6p4SZUYgIEpchybBqVJsJ1K_HuMUjoy2Tr3s690ADjHaI6Root-KDe2WrgqIMwOwBTnDGdUcnS4vzMyASchfCJEFEH8GEwIoYIooabg_SV6237EtW3r9gParW4GHeuuhbGDRvdx8BamKSy91VVcw87BtLKpDVxb3aSg99rE2tgbWFcpgdswh8k2p-DI6SbYs905A2_3d6_Lx2z1_PC0vF1lhrI8ZtRIh3TJEGKodKyi0lVOEE1zprHCKWBWslIYS7TUBGvOpeAMcZVeCinpDFyN__a--xpsiMWmDsY2jW5tN4RCEcpzwZRI8vpfiRFFClGRo0SzkRrfheCtK3pfb7T_Tqj47b0Yey_G3pO_3H09xn_6r-gELkbwGWLn93PGMZc8LfwB1JWJQg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1030903670</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Strengthening evaluation to capture the breadth of public health practice: ideal vs. real</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Pettman, Tahna L. ; Armstrong, Rebecca ; Doyle, Jodie ; Burford, Belinda ; Anderson, Laurie M. ; Hillgrove, Tessa ; Honey, Nikki ; Waters, Elizabeth</creator><creatorcontrib>Pettman, Tahna L. ; Armstrong, Rebecca ; Doyle, Jodie ; Burford, Belinda ; Anderson, Laurie M. ; Hillgrove, Tessa ; Honey, Nikki ; Waters, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><description>In a context of a limited, albeit growing evidence base for public health initiatives, the need for evaluation of public health practice remains crucial. However, the most rigorous evidence available to inform public health policy and interventions, in particular from systematic reviews, is often dominated by relatively large, tightly controlled intervention trials conducted by universities and other research organizations. Such research evidence tends to raise questions regarding the applicability and transferability of research to 'real world' practice. Adapted from the source document.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1741-3842</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1741-3850</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fds014</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22362969</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Cochrane Update ; Evidence-Based Practice - standards ; Health initiatives ; Humans ; Interventions ; Medical research ; Outcome and Process Assessment (Health Care) ; Public health ; Public health policy ; Public Health Practice ; Review Literature as Topic ; Transferability</subject><ispartof>Journal of public health (Oxford, England), 2012-03, Vol.34 (1), p.151-155</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c347t-3c8f0ab40040bf4d38fdf62a374a1914d34e84b6ce2a8a21a5586540593c86883</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c347t-3c8f0ab40040bf4d38fdf62a374a1914d34e84b6ce2a8a21a5586540593c86883</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/45158570$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/45158570$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,27924,27925,31000,58017,58250</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22362969$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pettman, Tahna L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Armstrong, Rebecca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doyle, Jodie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burford, Belinda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, Laurie M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hillgrove, Tessa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Honey, Nikki</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Waters, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><title>Strengthening evaluation to capture the breadth of public health practice: ideal vs. real</title><title>Journal of public health (Oxford, England)</title><addtitle>J Public Health (Oxf)</addtitle><description>In a context of a limited, albeit growing evidence base for public health initiatives, the need for evaluation of public health practice remains crucial. However, the most rigorous evidence available to inform public health policy and interventions, in particular from systematic reviews, is often dominated by relatively large, tightly controlled intervention trials conducted by universities and other research organizations. Such research evidence tends to raise questions regarding the applicability and transferability of research to 'real world' practice. Adapted from the source document.</description><subject>Cochrane Update</subject><subject>Evidence-Based Practice - standards</subject><subject>Health initiatives</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Interventions</subject><subject>Medical research</subject><subject>Outcome and Process Assessment (Health Care)</subject><subject>Public health</subject><subject>Public health policy</subject><subject>Public Health Practice</subject><subject>Review Literature as Topic</subject><subject>Transferability</subject><issn>1741-3842</issn><issn>1741-3850</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp90DtPwzAUBWALgWgpjIwgb7Ck9Ts2G6p4SZUYgIEpchybBqVJsJ1K_HuMUjoy2Tr3s690ADjHaI6Root-KDe2WrgqIMwOwBTnDGdUcnS4vzMyASchfCJEFEH8GEwIoYIooabg_SV6237EtW3r9gParW4GHeuuhbGDRvdx8BamKSy91VVcw87BtLKpDVxb3aSg99rE2tgbWFcpgdswh8k2p-DI6SbYs905A2_3d6_Lx2z1_PC0vF1lhrI8ZtRIh3TJEGKodKyi0lVOEE1zprHCKWBWslIYS7TUBGvOpeAMcZVeCinpDFyN__a--xpsiMWmDsY2jW5tN4RCEcpzwZRI8vpfiRFFClGRo0SzkRrfheCtK3pfb7T_Tqj47b0Yey_G3pO_3H09xn_6r-gELkbwGWLn93PGMZc8LfwB1JWJQg</recordid><startdate>20120301</startdate><enddate>20120301</enddate><creator>Pettman, Tahna L.</creator><creator>Armstrong, Rebecca</creator><creator>Doyle, Jodie</creator><creator>Burford, Belinda</creator><creator>Anderson, Laurie M.</creator><creator>Hillgrove, Tessa</creator><creator>Honey, Nikki</creator><creator>Waters, Elizabeth</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120301</creationdate><title>Strengthening evaluation to capture the breadth of public health practice: ideal vs. real</title><author>Pettman, Tahna L. ; Armstrong, Rebecca ; Doyle, Jodie ; Burford, Belinda ; Anderson, Laurie M. ; Hillgrove, Tessa ; Honey, Nikki ; Waters, Elizabeth</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c347t-3c8f0ab40040bf4d38fdf62a374a1914d34e84b6ce2a8a21a5586540593c86883</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Cochrane Update</topic><topic>Evidence-Based Practice - standards</topic><topic>Health initiatives</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Interventions</topic><topic>Medical research</topic><topic>Outcome and Process Assessment (Health Care)</topic><topic>Public health</topic><topic>Public health policy</topic><topic>Public Health Practice</topic><topic>Review Literature as Topic</topic><topic>Transferability</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pettman, Tahna L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Armstrong, Rebecca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doyle, Jodie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burford, Belinda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, Laurie M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hillgrove, Tessa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Honey, Nikki</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Waters, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of public health (Oxford, England)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pettman, Tahna L.</au><au>Armstrong, Rebecca</au><au>Doyle, Jodie</au><au>Burford, Belinda</au><au>Anderson, Laurie M.</au><au>Hillgrove, Tessa</au><au>Honey, Nikki</au><au>Waters, Elizabeth</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Strengthening evaluation to capture the breadth of public health practice: ideal vs. real</atitle><jtitle>Journal of public health (Oxford, England)</jtitle><addtitle>J Public Health (Oxf)</addtitle><date>2012-03-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>151</spage><epage>155</epage><pages>151-155</pages><issn>1741-3842</issn><eissn>1741-3850</eissn><abstract>In a context of a limited, albeit growing evidence base for public health initiatives, the need for evaluation of public health practice remains crucial. However, the most rigorous evidence available to inform public health policy and interventions, in particular from systematic reviews, is often dominated by relatively large, tightly controlled intervention trials conducted by universities and other research organizations. Such research evidence tends to raise questions regarding the applicability and transferability of research to 'real world' practice. Adapted from the source document.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>22362969</pmid><doi>10.1093/pubmed/fds014</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1741-3842 |
| ispartof | Journal of public health (Oxford, England), 2012-03, Vol.34 (1), p.151-155 |
| issn | 1741-3842 1741-3850 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_923576496 |
| source | MEDLINE; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Cochrane Update Evidence-Based Practice - standards Health initiatives Humans Interventions Medical research Outcome and Process Assessment (Health Care) Public health Public health policy Public Health Practice Review Literature as Topic Transferability |
| title | Strengthening evaluation to capture the breadth of public health practice: ideal vs. real |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T13%3A16%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Strengthening%20evaluation%20to%20capture%20the%20breadth%20of%20public%20health%20practice:%20ideal%20vs.%20real&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20public%20health%20(Oxford,%20England)&rft.au=Pettman,%20Tahna%20L.&rft.date=2012-03-01&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=151&rft.epage=155&rft.pages=151-155&rft.issn=1741-3842&rft.eissn=1741-3850&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/pubmed/fds014&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E45158570%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1030903670&rft_id=info:pmid/22362969&rft_jstor_id=45158570&rfr_iscdi=true |