Assessing the applicability of public health intervention evaluations from one setting to another: a methodological study of the usability and usefulness of assessment tools and frameworks

Abstract Background Public health interventions can be complicated, complex and context dependent, making the assessment of applicability challenging. Nevertheless, for them to be of use beyond the original study setting, they need to be generalisable to other settings and, crucially, research users...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Helen Elizabeth Denise Burchett, Laurence Blanchard, Dylan Kneale, James Thomas
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2018-09-01
Series:Health Research Policy and Systems
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12961-018-0364-3
id doaj-5829ba4e510b4a3990c286dcba8e5bee
record_format Article
spelling doaj-5829ba4e510b4a3990c286dcba8e5bee2020-11-24T21:28:27ZengBMCHealth Research Policy and Systems1478-45052018-09-0116111210.1186/s12961-018-0364-3Assessing the applicability of public health intervention evaluations from one setting to another: a methodological study of the usability and usefulness of assessment tools and frameworksHelen Elizabeth Denise Burchett0Laurence Blanchard1Dylan Kneale2James Thomas3Faculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical MedicineFaculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical MedicineEvidence for Policy and Practice Information and Coordinating Centre, UCL Institute of Education, University College LondonEvidence for Policy and Practice Information and Coordinating Centre, UCL Institute of Education, University College LondonAbstract Background Public health interventions can be complicated, complex and context dependent, making the assessment of applicability challenging. Nevertheless, for them to be of use beyond the original study setting, they need to be generalisable to other settings and, crucially, research users need to be able to identify to which contexts it may be applicable. There are many tools with set criteria for assessing generalisability/applicability, yet few seem to be widely used and there is no consensus on which should be used, or when. This methodological study aimed to test these tools to assess how easy they were to use and how useful they appeared to be. Methods We identified tools from an existing review and an update of its search. References were screened on pre-specified criteria. Included tools were tested by using them to assess the applicability of a Swedish weight management intervention to the English context. Researcher assessments and reflections on the usability and utility of the tools were gathered using a standard pro-forma. Results Eleven tools were included. Their length, content, style and time required to complete varied. No tool was considered ideal for assessing applicability. Their limitations included unrealistic criteria (requiring unavailable information), a focus on implementation to the neglect of transferability (i.e. little focus on potential effectiveness in the new setting), overly broad criteria (associated with low reliability), and a lack of an explicit focus on how interventions worked (i.e. their mechanisms of action). Conclusion Tools presenting criteria ready to be used may not be the best method for applicability assessments. They are likely to be either too long or incomplete, too focused on differences and fail to address elements that matter for the specific topic of interest. It is time to progress from developing lists of set criteria that are not widely used in the literature, to creating a new approach to applicability assessment. Focusing on mechanisms of action, rather than solely on characteristics, could be a useful approach, and one that remains underutilised in current tools. New approaches to assessing generalisability that evolve away from checklist style assessments need to be developed, tested, reported and discussed.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12961-018-0364-3ApplicabilityGeneralisabilityExternal validityTransferability
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Helen Elizabeth Denise Burchett
Laurence Blanchard
Dylan Kneale
James Thomas
spellingShingle Helen Elizabeth Denise Burchett
Laurence Blanchard
Dylan Kneale
James Thomas
Assessing the applicability of public health intervention evaluations from one setting to another: a methodological study of the usability and usefulness of assessment tools and frameworks
Health Research Policy and Systems
Applicability
Generalisability
External validity
Transferability
author_facet Helen Elizabeth Denise Burchett
Laurence Blanchard
Dylan Kneale
James Thomas
author_sort Helen Elizabeth Denise Burchett
title Assessing the applicability of public health intervention evaluations from one setting to another: a methodological study of the usability and usefulness of assessment tools and frameworks
title_short Assessing the applicability of public health intervention evaluations from one setting to another: a methodological study of the usability and usefulness of assessment tools and frameworks
title_full Assessing the applicability of public health intervention evaluations from one setting to another: a methodological study of the usability and usefulness of assessment tools and frameworks
title_fullStr Assessing the applicability of public health intervention evaluations from one setting to another: a methodological study of the usability and usefulness of assessment tools and frameworks
title_full_unstemmed Assessing the applicability of public health intervention evaluations from one setting to another: a methodological study of the usability and usefulness of assessment tools and frameworks
title_sort assessing the applicability of public health intervention evaluations from one setting to another: a methodological study of the usability and usefulness of assessment tools and frameworks
publisher BMC
series Health Research Policy and Systems
issn 1478-4505
publishDate 2018-09-01
description Abstract Background Public health interventions can be complicated, complex and context dependent, making the assessment of applicability challenging. Nevertheless, for them to be of use beyond the original study setting, they need to be generalisable to other settings and, crucially, research users need to be able to identify to which contexts it may be applicable. There are many tools with set criteria for assessing generalisability/applicability, yet few seem to be widely used and there is no consensus on which should be used, or when. This methodological study aimed to test these tools to assess how easy they were to use and how useful they appeared to be. Methods We identified tools from an existing review and an update of its search. References were screened on pre-specified criteria. Included tools were tested by using them to assess the applicability of a Swedish weight management intervention to the English context. Researcher assessments and reflections on the usability and utility of the tools were gathered using a standard pro-forma. Results Eleven tools were included. Their length, content, style and time required to complete varied. No tool was considered ideal for assessing applicability. Their limitations included unrealistic criteria (requiring unavailable information), a focus on implementation to the neglect of transferability (i.e. little focus on potential effectiveness in the new setting), overly broad criteria (associated with low reliability), and a lack of an explicit focus on how interventions worked (i.e. their mechanisms of action). Conclusion Tools presenting criteria ready to be used may not be the best method for applicability assessments. They are likely to be either too long or incomplete, too focused on differences and fail to address elements that matter for the specific topic of interest. It is time to progress from developing lists of set criteria that are not widely used in the literature, to creating a new approach to applicability assessment. Focusing on mechanisms of action, rather than solely on characteristics, could be a useful approach, and one that remains underutilised in current tools. New approaches to assessing generalisability that evolve away from checklist style assessments need to be developed, tested, reported and discussed.
topic Applicability
Generalisability
External validity
Transferability
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12961-018-0364-3
work_keys_str_mv AT helenelizabethdeniseburchett assessingtheapplicabilityofpublichealthinterventionevaluationsfromonesettingtoanotheramethodologicalstudyoftheusabilityandusefulnessofassessmenttoolsandframeworks
AT laurenceblanchard assessingtheapplicabilityofpublichealthinterventionevaluationsfromonesettingtoanotheramethodologicalstudyoftheusabilityandusefulnessofassessmenttoolsandframeworks
AT dylankneale assessingtheapplicabilityofpublichealthinterventionevaluationsfromonesettingtoanotheramethodologicalstudyoftheusabilityandusefulnessofassessmenttoolsandframeworks
AT jamesthomas assessingtheapplicabilityofpublichealthinterventionevaluationsfromonesettingtoanotheramethodologicalstudyoftheusabilityandusefulnessofassessmenttoolsandframeworks
_version_ 1725970271981010944