Following five factors influencing community participation (needs assessment, leadership, organisation, resource mobilisation and management), to assess participation in health care programs. The tools can be used to compare the same program at different points in time, to compare observations by different evaluators, and/or to compare perceptions of different participants in the same programs.
Rifkin, Susan B., Frits Muller, and Wolfgang Bichmann. “Primary health care: on measuring participation.” Social science & medicine 26.9 (1988): 931-940.
Download article ($) : http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277953688904133%20
* The tool is not available in a usable format
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)?