Advancing methods for program evaluation in substance use by strengthening the application of epidemiology, economic evaluation, and implementation science: Reflections on the opportunities for synergy

IF 2 4区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Natalie A. Blackburn , Sarah Philbrick , Sheila V. Patel , Jessica D. Cance , Elvira Elek , Brent Gibbons , Sazid Khan , Barrot H. Lambdin , Phillip W. Graham
{"title":"Advancing methods for program evaluation in substance use by strengthening the application of epidemiology, economic evaluation, and implementation science: Reflections on the opportunities for synergy","authors":"Natalie A. Blackburn ,&nbsp;Sarah Philbrick ,&nbsp;Sheila V. Patel ,&nbsp;Jessica D. Cance ,&nbsp;Elvira Elek ,&nbsp;Brent Gibbons ,&nbsp;Sazid Khan ,&nbsp;Barrot H. Lambdin ,&nbsp;Phillip W. Graham","doi":"10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2025.102610","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Program evaluation is necessary to assess the success of evidence-based programs in real-world, non-trial settings. In its most basic form, it involves understanding processes that impact the health and well-being of individuals and communities. Increasingly, robust program evaluations are integrating approaches from implementation science and economic evaluation to strengthen assessment, achievement, and sustainment of the intended impacts of evidence-based programs, while traditionally employing epidemiological methods to assess outcomes. Epidemiology, economic evaluation, and implementation science operate in overlapping yet siloed arenas, which can make it challenging for program evaluators to effectively engage all three disciplines. Furthermore, given their overlap, practitioners in these disciplines must understand differences in their purpose and lexicon to foster synergies. We use the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Evaluation Framework and an example from substance use prevention to reflect on specific concepts and terminology within each of these disciplines and how distinctions impact the ability of multidisciplinary teams to collaborate on evaluations. The implications apply to those designing, testing, implementing, and evaluating evidence-based programs—all of whom have the opportunity to consider and strengthen these elements when developing processes and measuring impact. The substance use prevention field needs to better understand how these disciplines can complement one another to enrich process, outcome, and impact evaluations, given the complexities of substance use behaviors and evidence-based programs to address them. With this synergy, clearer communication of findings from the different components can be achieved.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48046,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation and Program Planning","volume":"111 ","pages":"Article 102610"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evaluation and Program Planning","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718925000771","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Program evaluation is necessary to assess the success of evidence-based programs in real-world, non-trial settings. In its most basic form, it involves understanding processes that impact the health and well-being of individuals and communities. Increasingly, robust program evaluations are integrating approaches from implementation science and economic evaluation to strengthen assessment, achievement, and sustainment of the intended impacts of evidence-based programs, while traditionally employing epidemiological methods to assess outcomes. Epidemiology, economic evaluation, and implementation science operate in overlapping yet siloed arenas, which can make it challenging for program evaluators to effectively engage all three disciplines. Furthermore, given their overlap, practitioners in these disciplines must understand differences in their purpose and lexicon to foster synergies. We use the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Evaluation Framework and an example from substance use prevention to reflect on specific concepts and terminology within each of these disciplines and how distinctions impact the ability of multidisciplinary teams to collaborate on evaluations. The implications apply to those designing, testing, implementing, and evaluating evidence-based programs—all of whom have the opportunity to consider and strengthen these elements when developing processes and measuring impact. The substance use prevention field needs to better understand how these disciplines can complement one another to enrich process, outcome, and impact evaluations, given the complexities of substance use behaviors and evidence-based programs to address them. With this synergy, clearer communication of findings from the different components can be achieved.
通过加强流行病学、经济评估和实施科学的应用来推进物质使用项目评估的方法:对协同机会的思考
项目评估对于评估现实世界非试验环境中循证项目的成功与否是必要的。在其最基本的形式,它涉及了解影响个人和社区的健康和福祉的过程。在传统上采用流行病学方法评估结果的同时,越来越多的强有力的项目评估正在整合实施科学和经济评估的方法,以加强基于证据的项目预期影响的评估、成就和维持。流行病学、经济评估和实施科学在重叠而又孤立的领域中运作,这使得项目评估人员有效地将这三个学科结合起来具有挑战性。此外,考虑到它们的重叠,这些学科的从业者必须了解它们的目的和词汇的差异,以促进协同作用。我们使用疾病控制和预防中心评估框架和物质使用预防的一个例子来反思这些学科中的具体概念和术语,以及差异如何影响多学科团队合作评估的能力。其含义适用于那些设计、测试、实施和评估基于证据的项目的人——他们在开发过程和测量影响时都有机会考虑和加强这些要素。药物使用预防领域需要更好地理解这些学科如何相互补充,以丰富过程、结果和影响评估,考虑到药物使用行为的复杂性和基于证据的方案来解决这些问题。通过这种协同作用,可以实现来自不同组件的结果的更清晰的沟通。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Evaluation and Program Planning
Evaluation and Program Planning SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
6.20%
发文量
112
期刊介绍: Evaluation and Program Planning is based on the principle that the techniques and methods of evaluation and planning transcend the boundaries of specific fields and that relevant contributions to these areas come from people representing many different positions, intellectual traditions, and interests. In order to further the development of evaluation and planning, we publish articles from the private and public sectors in a wide range of areas: organizational development and behavior, training, planning, human resource development, health and mental, social services, mental retardation, corrections, substance abuse, and education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信