IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v17y1993i2p204-220.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Formative and Process Evaluation of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Programs

Author

Listed:
  • Mary-Anne Dehar

    (University of Auckland)

  • Sally Casswell

    (University of Auckland)

  • Paul Duignan

    (University of Auckland)

Abstract

This article discusses the concepts of formative and process evaluation, and their application in the field of health promotion and disease prevention. Process evaluation fulfills the need for information on program implementation, which is important in interpreting program outcomes, and informing future efforts in similar areas. Formative evaluation aims to help develop and improve programs from an early stage, when opportunities for influence are likely to be greatest. Greater application of formative and process evaluation to such programs in thefuture has the potential to lead to better designed and more effective programs, and improved understanding of the factors influencing program outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Mary-Anne Dehar & Sally Casswell & Paul Duignan, 1993. "Formative and Process Evaluation of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Programs," Evaluation Review, , vol. 17(2), pages 204-220, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:17:y:1993:i:2:p:204-220
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X9301700205
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X9301700205
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X9301700205?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edwards, Patricia Klobus, 1987. "Conceptual and methodological issues in evaluating emergent programs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 27-33, January.
    2. Tornatzky, Louis G. & Johnson, Elmima C., 1982. "Research on implementation : Implications for evaluation practice and evaluation policy," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 193-198, January.
    3. Altman, David G., 1986. "A framework for evaluating community-based heart disease prevention programs," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 479-487, January.
    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. Papineau, Danielle & Kiely, Margaret C., 1996. "Participatory evaluation in a community organization: Fostering stakeholder empowerment and utilization," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 79-93, February.

    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. Schmidt, Christoph M. & Baltussen, Rob & Sauerborn, Rainer, 2000. "The Evaluation of Community-Based Interventions: Group Randomization, Limits and Alternatives," IZA Discussion Papers 206, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Sarah A. McGraw & Deborah E. Sellers & Carolyn C. Johnson & Elaine J. Stone & Kathryn J. Bachman & Judith Bebchuk & Russell V. Luepker & Elizabeth W. Edmundson, 1996. "Using Process Data To Explain Outcomes," Evaluation Review, , vol. 20(3), pages 291-312, June.
    3. Viadro, Claire I. & Earp, Jo Anne L. & Altpeter, Mary, 1997. "Designing a process evaluation for a comprehensive breast cancer screening intervention: Challenges and opportunities," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 237-249, August.
    4. Veikko Tähkä & Heimo Viinamäki & Kaj Koskela, 1990. "Interaction in Health Education," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 36(2), pages 99-110, June.
    5. Brooke S. Harrow & Thomas M. Lasater & Kim M. Gans, 1996. "A Strategy for Accurate Collection of Incremental Cost Data for Cost-Effectiveness Analyses in Field Trials," Evaluation Review, , vol. 20(3), pages 275-290, June.
    6. Terri L. Griffith & David A. Tansik & Lehman Benson, 2002. "Negotiating Technology Implementation: An Empirical Investigation of a Website Introduction," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 1-22, January.
    7. Feinberg, Mark E. & Greenberg, Mark T. & Osgood, D. Wayne & Anderson, Amy & Babinski, Leslie, 2002. "The effects of training community leaders in prevention science: Communities That Care in Pennsylvania," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 245-259, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sae:evarev:v:17:y:1993:i:2:p:204-220. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.