Train the Trainer Course book - Cochrane Public Health Group

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Economic efficiency Harms Economic outcomes: cost, cost effectiveness, costbenefit, or cost-utility Any harms from the intervention that are presented in the data Adoption Intervention Provider Who delivered the intervention Training and experience of the interventionists If the intervention is delivered by a team, indicate its members and their specific tasks Contacts Number of contacts made between the providers and each participant Duration of each contact Implementation Maintenance Setting Individual level Medium Presentation format Content Infrastructure of the health care delivery system or the community Access to the intervention Adherence Program level Integrity Individual level Sustainability of outcomes Program level Sustainability of the intervention Medium by which the intervention was delivered: in–person, telephone, electronic, mail To individuals or groups With family or friends present Is economic efficiency part of the decision-making process? If so, are the data on cost or economic efficiency relevant to the user’s situation? Are these harms relevant to the user’s population? Are there other potential harms? How is the user balancing potential benefits with potential harms? Are the described interventions reproducible in the situation under consideration? Is the provider expertise and training available? Is the frequency of contacts in the study feasible in the current situation? Is this medium feasible in the user’s situation? Is this format feasible in the current situation? Based on existing tools and Is this feasible in the current materials or developed denovo situation? Tailoring of the intervention to individuals or subgroups Organisational or local infrastructure for implementing the intervention Access to the intervention among the target population Individual rate of adherence to the intervention Attrition rate from the program The extent to which the intervention delivered as planned Is the needed infrastructure present in the current situation? Does the current situation provide the resources to ensure access to the intervention? Are there barriers to adherence in the current situation? Are their local factors that might influence the attrition rate? Are there barriers to implementation in the current situation? Change in behaviour or What is the relative importance other important outcomes in of short- versus long-term the long term outcomes to the user? Facets of the intervention that were sustainable in the long term Infrastructure that supported a sustained Is the intervention feasible in the long term in the user’s setting? Does the necessary infrastructure exist? Are there available resources? What 126
intervention Barriers to long-term use of the intervention barriers to sustainability might be anticipated? * “Data to be collected” and “applicability” can be applied to the individual study or to the body of evidence 7) Trade-offs between benefits and harms Reviewers should discuss whether there were any adverse effects of the interventions, or describe if there were certain groups that received more/less benefit from the interventions (differential effectiveness). If cost data is provided for the interventions studies this should also be reported. 8) Implications for practice and future health promotion and public health research Public health and health promotion reviewers are in an ideal position to determine the implications for practice and future research to be conducted to address any gaps in the evidence base. For example, where evidence is shown to be lacking, reviewers should clearly describe the type of research required, including the study design, participants, intervention details and contexts and settings. If the reviewed evidence base is flawed due to particular methodological issues (eg. outcome assessment tools, allocation bias, etc) these quality issues can be addressed in future studies. REFERENCES 1. Undertaking Systematic Reviews of Research on Effectiveness. CRD’s Guidance for those Carrying Out or Commissioning Reviews. CRD Report Number 4 (2 nd Edition). NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York. March 2001. http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/report4.htm 2. Donner A, Klar N. Pitfalls of and controversies in cluster randomization trials. Am J Public Health. 2004 Mar;94(3):416-22. 3. Sorensen G, Emmons K, Hunt MK, Johnston D. Implications of the results of community intervention trials. Annu Rev Public Health. 1998;19:379-416. 4. Mittelmark MB, Hunt MK, Heath GW, Schmid TL. Realistic outcomes: lessons from communitybased research and demonstration programs for the prevention of cardiovascular diseases. J Public Health Policy. 1993 Winter;14(4):437-62. 5. Nutbeam D, Harris E. Theory in a Nutshell. A practical guide to health promotion theories. McGraw-Hill Australia Pty Ltd, 2004. 6. Hawe P, Shiell A, Riley T, Gold L. Methods for exploring implementation variation and local context within a cluster randomised community intervention trial. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2004 Sep;58(9):788-93. 7. Shediac-Rizkallah MC, Bone LR. Planning for the sustainability of community-based health programs: conceptual frameworks and future directions for research, practice and policy. Health Educ Res 1998;13:87-108. 8. Bossert TJ. Can they get along without us? Sustainability of donor-supported health projects in Central America and Africa. Soc Sci Med 1990;30:1015-23. 127
Page 1 and 2:
TRAIN-THE-TRAINER HANDBOOOK Two-day
Page 3:
Contents Introduction .............
Page 6 and 7:
Additional reading: Textbooks: Oliv
Page 8 and 9:
2) ONCE REGISTRATIONS HAVE BEEN REC
Page 11:
OUTLINE OF TWO-DAY WORKSHOP 9:00am
Page 15 and 16:
Unit One: Background to Systematic
Page 17 and 18:
Reviews of clinical interventions v
Page 19 and 20:
FACILITATOR’S GUIDE Time required
Page 21 and 22:
Unit Two: International Systematic
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Unit Three: Resources Required Lear
Page 27:
Formulate review question Establish
Page 31 and 32:
Unit Four: Developing a Protocol Le
Page 33 and 34:
Establish an Advisory Group whose m
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Unit Five: Asking an Answerable Que
Page 39 and 40:
To investigate both the implementat
Page 41 and 42:
Process evaluations: these studies
Page 43 and 44:
REFERENCES 1. Oliver S. 1997. Explo
Page 45 and 46:
FACILATOR’S GUIDE Time required:
Page 47 and 48:
Unit Six: Finding The Evidence Lear
Page 49 and 50:
CA38392 (NCI) Language English Entr
Page 51 and 52:
Where to locate studies a) Electron
Page 53 and 54:
ADDITIONAL READING Harden A, Peersm
Page 55 and 56:
45. "Diet-Fat-Restricted"/ all subh
Page 57 and 58:
Brunton G, Harden A, Rees R, Kavana
Page 59 and 60:
1. Start with the primary concept,
Page 61 and 62:
5. Because adolescent has no narrow
Page 63:
12. Complete searches 8-12 and 13-2
Page 67 and 68:
Unit Seven: Data Abstraction Learni
Page 69:
Page 72 and 73:
Introduction of bias into the condu
Page 74 and 75:
population on gender, age, or educa
Page 76 and 77:
5) Data collection methods As highl
Page 78 and 79:
These data provide important inform
Page 80 and 81: 11. Green J, Tones K. Towards a sec
Page 83 and 84: QUALITY ASSESSMENT TOOL FOR QUANTIT
Page 85 and 86: G) ANALYSIS (Q1) Is there a sample
Page 87 and 88: DICTIONARY for the Effective Public
Page 89 and 90: (i) (ii) If the study was reported
Page 91 and 92: F) WITHDRAWALS AND DROP-OUTS Q1 Ind
Page 93: C) CONFOUNDERS Strong Moderate Weak
Page 96 and 97: Emphasise that the criteria to appr
Page 98 and 99: Randomised controlled trial - criti
Page 100 and 101: calculation? Yes Partially No (Q2)
Page 102 and 103: Controlled before and after study -
Page 104 and 105: RATE THIS SECTION Strong Moderate W
Page 106 and 107: 102
Page 108 and 109: Pope C, Mays N. Qualitative Researc
Page 110 and 111: Screening Questions 1 Was there a c
Page 112 and 113: ……………………………
Page 114 and 115: 110
Page 116 and 117: A Checklist for Evaluating Evidence
Page 118 and 119: 114
Page 120 and 121: Where studies are more homogenous,
Page 122 and 123: 118
Page 124 and 125: 120
Page 126 and 127: esulting from some community interv
Page 128 and 129: Reviewers should use the RE-AIM mod
Page 132 and 133: 9. Swerrissen H, Crisp BR. The sust
Page 134 and 135: Exercise: Allow participants 20 min
Page 136 and 137: who had participated in their smoki
Page 138 and 139: Critical Appraisal Skills Programme
Page 140 and 141: ……………………………
Page 142 and 143: 2 points out of the possible 4 poin
Page 144 and 145: - search for non-English language s
Page 146: 9. Were all important outcomes cons
show all

Train the Trainer Course book - Cochrane Public Health Group

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?