Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Evaluating health inequity interventions: Applying a contextual (external) validity framework to programs funded by the Canadian Health Services Research Foundation

Contents:

Author Info

  • Phillips, Kaye
  • Müller-Clemm, Werner
  • Ysselstein, Margaretha
  • Sachs, Jonathan
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    Including context in the measurement and evaluation of health in equity interventions is critical to understanding how events that occur in an intervention's environment might contribute to or impede its success. This study adapted and piloted a contextual validity assessment framework on a selection of health inequity-related programs funded by the Canadian Health Services Research Foundation (CHSRF) between 1998 and 2006. The two overarching objectives of this study were (1) to determine the relative amount and quality of attention given to conceptualizing, measuring and validating context within CHSRF funded research final reports related to health-inequity; and (2) to contribute evaluative evidence towards the incorporation of context into the assessment and measurement of health inequity interventions. The study found that of the 42/146 CHSRF programs and projects, judged to be related to health inequity 20 adequately reported on the conceptualization, measurement and validation of context. Amongst these health-inequity related project reports, greatest emphasis was placed on describing the socio-political and economical context over actually measuring and validating contextual evidence. Applying a contextual validity assessment framework was useful for distinguishing between the descriptive (conceptual) versus empirical (measurement and validation) inclusion of documented contextual evidence. Although contextual validity measurement frameworks needs further development, this study contributes insight into identifying funded research related to health inequities and preliminary criteria for assessing interventions targeted at specific populations and jurisdictions. This study also feeds a larger critical dialogue (albeit beyond the scope of this study) regarding the relevance and utility of using evaluative techniques for understanding how specific external conditions support or impede the successful implementation of health inequity interventions.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718912000274
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Bibliographic Info

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Evaluation and Program Planning.

    Volume (Year): 36 (2013)
    Issue (Month): 1 ()
    Pages: 198-203

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:36:y:2013:i:1:p:198-203

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan

    Related research

    Keywords: Context; Contextual validity; External validity; Validity; Health inequities; Health inequity interventions; Program evaluation;

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Frohlich, Katherine L. & Ross, Nancy & Richmond, Chantelle, 2006. "Health disparities in Canada today: Some evidence and a theoretical framework," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(2-3), pages 132-143, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:36:y:2013:i:1:p:198-203. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.