Getting the word out: Multiple methods for disseminating evaluation findings
Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, ISSN: 1078-4659, Vol: 14, Issue: 2, Page: 170-176
2008
- 16Citations
- 48Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations16
- Citation Indexes11
- 11
- CrossRef7
- Policy Citations5
- Policy Citation5
- Captures48
- Readers48
- 48
Article Description
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of different strategies for disseminating evaluation Results to program stakeholders. METHODS: The Results from a process evaluation of eight states' tobacco control programs were disseminated to the state programs that were assigned to one of four dissemination conditions: print Reports only, Reports and Web site, Reports and workshop, or all three dissemination modes. Key measures included levels of usefulness of the evaluation Results and satisfaction of participation by study participants. RESULTS: Although exposure to the Web site and workshop individually did not provide a statistically higher degree of usefulness, a clear upward trend was observed in usefulness as the number of dissemination modes increased. Participants who engaged in all three dissemination modes found the Results more useful (P < .05) for their work and the work of their agency than participants using one or two dissemination modes. Participants who engaged in the three dissemination modes also appeared to be more likely to share the Results with their colleagues (P = .06). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that disseminating evaluation Results through multiple, active modes increased usefulness, satisfaction, and further dissemination of the Results. Evaluators should consider implementing more than one mode of dissemination to share findings with stakeholders. © 2008 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=39749092401&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.phh.0000311896.65454.77; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18287924; https://journals.lww.com/00124784-200803000-00015; http://content.wkhealth.com/linkback/openurl?sid=WKPTLP:landingpage&an=00124784-200803000-00015; https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.phh.0000311896.65454.77; https://insights.ovid.com/article/00124784-200803000-00015
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know