Objective

To review and score project plans to assess planners’ intentions to elicit community participation along five dimensions: WHO is to participate? In WHAT activities? And through which process or HOW, given the PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS, and the conditions in the TASK ENVIRONMENT?

Reference

Kroutil, Larry A., and Eugenia Eng. “Conceptualizing and assessing potential for community participation: A planning method.” Health Education Research 4.3 (1989): 305-319.

Visit Website ($) : https://academic.oup.com/her/article-abstract/4/3/305/637633/Conceptualizing-and-assessing-potential-for?redirectedFrom=PDF

Assessment

60%
Scientific Rigour
20%
Patient and Public Perspective
20%
Comprehensiveness
20%
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.