Patient and public engagement Evaluation Toolkit

Health Research

Community Engagement in Research Index (CERI)

Type : checklist

Assessment Question mark icon

  • Scientific Rigour
  • Patient and Public Perspective
  • Comprehensiveness
  • Usability

Objective

To offer a multidimensional view of community engagement in the research process.

Reference

Khodyakov, Dmitry, et al. “On measuring community participation in research.” Health Education & Behavior 40.3 (2013): 346-354.

 

* The tool is not available in a usable format

Assessment Question mark icon

  • Scientific Rigour
  • Patient and Public Perspective
  • Comprehensiveness
  • Usability

Assessment Grid

We provide a five-point rating for each of the following four criteria:
  • Scientific Rigour: Was the development of the evaluation tool scientifically rigorous and based on existing evidence on patient and public engagement?
  • Patient and Public Perspective: Does the evaluation tool take into account the views of patients and the public (both in its development and use)?
  • Comprehensiveness: Is the tool comprehensive in evaluating the context, process, outcomes and impacts of patient and public engagement?
  • Usability: Is the evaluation tool easy to use?
Each criterion has 5 question-items. We gave 1 point per item if the answer to the question was YES, 0 points if the answer was NO or CANNOT ANSWER.
  • Is the evaluation tool based on a comprehensive literature review on patient and public engagement research?
  • Is the evaluation tool based on the experience/expertise of key stakeholders?
  • Is the evaluation tool based on a conceptual/theoretical framework of patient and public engagement?
  • Was the evaluation tool tested for validity (i.e., the tool evaluates what it is purported to evaluate)?
  • Was the evaluation tool tested for reliability (i.e., the tool produces stable and consistent results)?
  • Were patients and/or the public involved in the development of the evaluation tool?
  • Is the tool designed to be completed by patients and/or members of the public (self-administered)?
  • Does the tool explicitly state that the evaluation results must be reported back to patients and the public?
  • Was the tool specifically designed to evaluate patient and public engagement activities?
  • Does the tool capture the influence of patients and the public? (e.g., on the engagement process, on the final decisions, etc.)
  • Does the tool document the context of engagement?
  • Does the tool document the process of engagement?
  • Does the tool document the outcome/impact of engagement?
  • Does the tool monitor the engagement process at multiple moments?
  • Does the tool consist of a set of open and closed questions?
  • Is the purpose of the evaluation tool stated?
  • Is the evaluation tool freely available?
  • Is the evaluation tool available in an applicable format?
  • Is the evaluation tool easy to read and understand?
  • Is the tool accompanied by instructions for use?
Logo of the CEPPP (pied de page)
Shares