The use of evidence-based outcomes in systems and organizations providing services and supports to persons with intellectual disability
AbstractThis article describes how evidence-based outcomes (EBOs) can be used to improve clinical, managerial, and policy decisions. As a component of evidence-based practices, EBOs are defined as measures obtained from the assessment of quality of life-related indicators that are based on a cross-culturally validated quality of life conceptual and measurement model, have utility in that they can be used for multiple purposes, and have robustness in reference to reliability and validity of the assessment strategy employed. A 5-component EBO model is described that provides a framework for the activities involved in selecting, developing, and implementing evidence-based outcomes. Three international examples based on the reliable, valid, and standardized assessment of individual quality of life outcomes are presented that demonstrate how EBOs can be used to improve clinical, managerial, and policy decision making. The article concludes with a discussion of guidelines for developing and using EBOs, and the challenges involved in their use.
Download InfoIf 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.
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 InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Evaluation and Program Planning.
Volume (Year): 36 (2013)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan
Evidence-based practices; Evidence-based outcomes; Quality of life; Program planning and evaluation; Quality management;
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.:
- Pollitt, Christopher & Bouckaert, Geert, 2004. "Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780199268498.
- Schalock, Robert L. & Bonham, Gordon S., 2003. "Measuring outcomes and managing for results," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 229-235, August.
- Schalock, Robert L. & Verdugo, Miguel Angel & Gomez, Laura E., 2011. "Evidence-based practices in the field of intellectual and developmental disabilities: An international consensus approach," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 273-282, August.
- Gómez, Laura E. & Verdugo, Miguel Ángel & Arias, Benito & Navas, Patricia & Schalock, Robert L., 2013. "The development and use of Provider Profiles at the organizational and systems level," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 17-26.
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.