IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v78y2020ics0149718919301831.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analyzing free-text survey responses: An accessible strategy for developing patient-centered programs and program evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Abraham, Traci H.
  • Deen, Tisha L.
  • Hamilton, Michelle
  • True, Gala
  • O’Neil, Marie T.
  • Blanchard, Jessica
  • Uddo, Madeline

Abstract

Despite widespread availability of yoga in the Veterans Health Administration (VA), it remains unclear how to best evaluate yoga programs. This is particularly problematic for programs aimed at veterans with mental health concerns, as evaluation typically focuses narrowly upon mental health symptom severity, even though program participants may have other health-related priorities. We analyzed responses to free-text questions on 237 surveys completed by veterans with mental health concerns enrolled in a yoga program at six VA clinics in Louisiana to characterize veteran participants’ experiences with yoga. Qualitative analysis resulted in 15 domains reflecting veterans’ individual health-related values and priorities. We use results to illustrate the potential for analysis of free-text responses to reveal valuable insights into patient experiences, demonstrating how these data can inform patient-centered program evaluation. The approach we present is more accessible to those responsible for decision-making about local programs than conventional methods of analyzing qualitive evaluation data.

Suggested Citation

  • Abraham, Traci H. & Deen, Tisha L. & Hamilton, Michelle & True, Gala & O’Neil, Marie T. & Blanchard, Jessica & Uddo, Madeline, 2020. "Analyzing free-text survey responses: An accessible strategy for developing patient-centered programs and program evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:78:y:2020:i:c:s0149718919301831
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2019.101733
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718919301831
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2019.101733?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Makrakis, Vassilios & Kostoulas-Makrakis, Nelly, 2016. "Bridging the qualitative–quantitative divide: Experiences from conducting a mixed methods evaluation in the RUCAS programme," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 144-151.
    2. Celik, Halime & Abma, Tineke A. & Klinge, Ineke & Widdershoven, Guy A.M., 2012. "Process evaluation of a diversity training program: The value of a mixed method strategy," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 54-65.
    3. Dennis, Michael L. & Fetterman, David M. & Sechrest, Lee, 1994. "Integrating qualitative and quantitative evaluation methods in substance abuse research," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 419-427.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Teasdale, Rebecca M., 2022. "Representing the values of program participants: Endogenous evaluative criteria," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pelucha, Martin & Kveton, Viktor & Potluka, Oto, 2019. "Using mixed method approach in measuring effects of training in firms: Case study of the European Social Fund support," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 146-155.
    2. Grant, Peter R., 1997. "The relocation of nursing home residents: An illustration of the advantages gained by planning a new program and designing an implementation evaluation together," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 507-516, November.
    3. Norwood, Michael Francis & Lakhani, Ali & Maujean, Annick & Downes, Martin & Fullagar, Simone & McIntyre, Michelle & Byrne, Jason & Stewart, Anna & Barber, Bonnie L. & Kendall, Elizabeth, 2019. "Assessing emotional and social health using photographs: An innovative research method for rural studies and its applicability in a care-farming program for youth," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    4. Maria Rosario Perello-Marín & Gabriela Ribes-Giner & Odette Pantoja Díaz, 2018. "Enhancing Education for Sustainable Development in Environmental University Programmes: A Co-Creation Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-17, January.
    5. Yang Liu, 2022. "Paradigmatic Compatibility Matters: A Critical Review of Qualitative-Quantitative Debate in Mixed Methods Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.
    6. Pantaleón D. Romero & Nicolas Montes & Sara Barquero & Paula Aloy & Teresa Ferrer & Marusela Granell & Manuel Millán, 2021. "EXPLORIA, a New Way to Teach Maths at University Level as Part of Everything," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-19, May.
    7. Lucía Hilario & Marta Covadonga Mora & Nicolás Montés & Pantaleón David Romero & Sara Barquero, 2022. "Gamification for Maths and Physics in University Degrees through a Transportation Challenge," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(21), pages 1-20, November.
    8. Alicja Balcerak & Jacek Woźniak, 2022. "Shaping Pro-Environmental Attitudes through Higher Education—A Preliminary Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-17, October.
    9. Jerrell, Jeanette M. & Ridgely, M. Susan, 1999. "The relative impact of treatment program `robustness' and `dosage' on client outcomes," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 323-330, August.
    10. Vassilios Makrakis & Nelly Kostoulas-Makrakis, 2023. "A Participatory Curriculum Approach to ICT-Enabled Education for Sustainability in Higher Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-11, February.
    11. Pamela Hermosilla & Felipe Muñoz-La Rivera & Nicolás Ateaga & Elisa Gallardo, 2021. "Strategy for the Evaluation and Monitoring of Competencies in Engineering Programs to Improve Students’ Learning and Quality of Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, October.
    12. Appannah, Arti & Meyer, Claudia & Ogrin, Rajna & McMillan, Sally & Barrett, Elizabeth & Browning, Colette, 2017. "Diversity training for the community aged care workers: A conceptual framework for evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 74-81.
    13. Brown, J. Lynne & Kiernan, Nancy Ellen, 2001. "Assessing the subsequent effect of a formative evaluation on a program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 129-143, May.
    14. Braver, Sanford L. & Smith, Melanie C., 1996. "Maximizing both external and internal validity in longitudinal true experiments with voluntary treatments: The "combined modified" design," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 287-300, November.
    15. Jeremiah, Rohan D. & Quinn, Camille R. & Alexis, Jicinta M., 2018. "Lessons learned: Evaluating the program fidelity of UNWomen Partnership for Peace domestic violence diversion program in the Eastern Caribbean," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 61-67.
    16. Moriña, Anabel & Carballo, Rafael, 2017. "The impact of a faculty training program on inclusive education and disability," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 77-83.
    17. Devin Naidoo & Andrea Echarri-Gonzalez & Sarah Levitt & Alexander Mass & Eric Smith & Daryle Lamonica & Julianne Hall, 2023. "Evaluation of a Multipart Implicit Bias Educational Program Designed for a Non-Profit Organization," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-17, September.
    18. Zhang, Tingting & Yan, Xiangbin & Wang, William Yu Chung & Chen, Qin, 2021. "Unveiling physicians’ personal branding strategies in online healthcare service platforms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:78:y:2020:i:c:s0149718919301831. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.