Using theory of change to assess impact of knowledge translation initiatives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Issue The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools (NCCMT) offers high quality supports to public health professionals on evidence-informed decision making (EIDM). We developed a theory of change evaluation framework to guide evaluations of our programs and services to ensure that the NCCMT's resources and training continue to be high quality and meet the needs of public health professionals globally. Description of the Problem Our objective was to develop an evaluation framework that illustrates our reach, quality, and impact. The NCCMT contracted an external program evaluation expert to assist in developing a revised framework to better capture these aspects. An inductive approach was used to identify evaluation themes through internal document review, and a review of applicable program evaluation literature. Results A revised evaluation framework, influenced by theory of change, was developed and is being implemented at the NCCMT. The theory of change visualizes how the NCCMT influences EIDM and public health practice through four stages that progress from creation of products and services, to knowledge and awareness, to engagement and capacity development, and finally to policy and practice changes embedded within organizational structures. Specific outcome indicators include: public health professionals' confidence, knowledge, and skills; improved public health programs; organizational support for evidence-informed decision making; and workforce engagement and competence. Lessons This innovative evaluation framework informed by a theory of change resulted in significant streamlining of the centre's evaluation activities, and has provided clearer direction with respect to the purpose of evaluation, as well as enhanced ability to capture the centre's reach, quality and impact. The lessons of the importance of using theory of change to underpin evaluation activities can be applied to other public health organizations globally. Key messages Applying an evaluation framework supports effective and efficient programming. The evaluation framework demonstrates the NCCMT’s impact and reach in public health.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.296 | 0.479 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".