European public health best practice portal - process and criteria for best practice assessment

Stępień, Magdalena; Keller, Ingrid; Takki, Marianne; Caldeira, Sandra

doi:10.1186/s13690-022-00892-5

Cited by 9 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If the practice is included, the next step is the evaluation of the effectiveness and efficiency of the practice, as well as how the practice addresses equity issues. Finally, the last step focusses on the information about its transferability to other settings and contexts (e.g., availability of manuals, intervention material, training and necessary actions to overcome barriers), sustainability, ability to foster collaboration among different sectors and the inclusion of stakeholders through the whole cycle of the practice [ 16 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of the newest HPPR (SI) has already adopted the criteria of the EU assessment criteria, which facilitates the exchange of practices at EU level. For longer existing HPPRs, which already contain specific and unique criteria, adaption may not presently be possible, but should be kept in mind in future discussions on the merits of linking national HPPRs and DG SANTE’s HPPR [ 16 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Health promotion and disease prevention registries in the EU: a cross country comparison

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Health promotion and disease prevention programme registries (HPPRs), also called ‘best practice portals’, serve as entry points and practical repositories that provide decision-makers with easy access to (evidence-based) practices. However, there is limited knowledge of differences or overlaps of howe current national HPPRs in Europe function, the context and circumstances in which these HPPRs were developed, and the mechanisms utilised by each HPPR for the assessment, classification and quality improvement of the included practices. This study prepared an overview of different approaches in several national HPPRs and the EU Best Practice Portal (EU BPP) as well as identified commonalities and differences among the core characteristics of the HPPRs. Methods We conducted a descriptive comparison – that focused on six European countries with existing or recently developed/implemented national HPPR and the EU BPP –to create a comparative overview. We used coding mechanisms to identify commonalities and differences; we performed data management, collection and building consensus during EuroHealthNet Thematic Working Group meetings. Results All HPPRs offer a broad range of health promotion and disease-prevention practices and serve to support practitioners, policymakers and researchers in selecting practices. Almost all HPPRs have an assessment process in place or planned, requiring the application of assessment criteria that differ among the HPPRs. While all HPPRs collect and share recommendable practices, others have implemented further measures to improve the quality of the submitted practices. Different dissemination tools and strategies are employed to promote the use of the HPPRs, including social media, newsletters and publications as well as capacity building workshops for practice owners or technical options to connect citizens/patients with local practices. Conclusions Collaboration between HPPRs (at national and EU level) is appreciated, especially regarding the use consistent terminology to avoid misinterpretation, facilitate cross-country comparison and enable discussions on the adaption of assessment criteria by national HPPRs. Greater efforts are needed to promote the actual implementation and transfer of practices at the national level to address public health challenges with proven and effective practices.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health promotion and disease prevention registries in the EU: a cross country comparison

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In particular, for countries considering the introduction of a national HPPR (e. g. Portugal) or where HPPRs are still under development (Slovenia, Poland, Finland), adapting the EU assessment criteria (or selecting certain common 'core criteria') may be a useful solution to promote comparability of practices across countries. Especially, for longer existing HPPRs, which already contain speci c and unique criteria, adaption may not be possible at present, but should be kept in mind in future discussions on the merits of linking national HPPRs and DG SANTE's HPPR (19).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the Netherlands and the EU, the process of selecting and transferring "Best Practices" is structurally anchored and supported by funding. Both, the European and the Dutch HPPR go beyond Brownsons' recommendation (14) by not only sharing information on evidence-based practices but also promoting their implementation through nancial support (19).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Registries in the E.U.: A cross country comparison

Roßmann

Krnel²,

Kylänen

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Health promotion and disease prevention programme registries (HPPR), or ‘best practice portals’, serve as entry points and practical repositories which enable decision-makers to have easy access to (evidence-based) practices. However, there is limited knowledge of differences or overlaps in the functioning of current national HPPRs in Europe, the context and circumstances in which these HPPRs were developed, and the mechanisms utilised by each HPPR for assessment, classification and quality improvement of included practices. The aim of the study was to prepare an overview of different approaches in several national HPPRs and the EU Best Practice Portal (EU BPP) as well as to identify commonalities and differences among core characteristics of the HPPRs. Methods: A descriptive comparison – focused on six European countries with an existing or recently developed/implemented national HPPR and the EU BPP – was conducted to create a comparative overview. Coding mechanisms were used to identify commonalities and differences, and data management, collection and building consensus were performed during EuroHealthNet Thematic Working Group meetings. Results: All HPPRs offer a broad range of health promotion and disease prevention practices and are designed to support practitioners, policy makers and researchers in selecting practices. Almost all HPPRs have an assessment process in place or planned, requiring the application of assessment criteria that differ among the HPPRs. While all HPPRs collect and share recommendable practices, others have implemented further measures to improve the quality of submitted practices. Different dissemination tools and strategies are employed to promote the use of the HPPRs, including social media, newsletters and publications as well as capacity building workshops for practice owners or technical options to connect citizens/patients with local practices. Conclusions: Collaboration between HPPRs (at national and EU levels) is appreciated, especially in terms of using consistent terminology to avoid misinterpretation and facilitate cross-country comparison, as well as to facilitate discussion on the adaption of assessment criteria by national HPPRs. Greater efforts are needed to promote the actual implementation and transfer of practices at national level in order to address public health challenges with proven and effective practices.

show abstract

“…This is a welcome development as it means that more institutions have recognized the need and added value of this approach. The exchange of best practices has a potential to improve health by demonstrating what interventions worked well in similar settings and populations, it avoids "re-inventing the wheel" in designing and piloting of similar interventions, building upon ones' expertise and more e cient use of resources (7).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluator’s alignment as an important indicator of reliability of assessment procedure for recognizing the good practice in public health: piloting newly developed criteria.

Vinko¹,

Lesnik²,

Krnel³

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The Slovenian “Criteria for assessing public health interventions for the purpose of identifying and selecting good practices” is a tool designed to identify and select good practices in public health. Public health professionals used the criteria to evaluate interventions and assign scores based on three levels: Exclusion, Core, and Additional Criteria. The assessment took place from 2021 to 2022. The individual scores were compiled and a panel discussion was held to reach a final score. The interrater agreement was measured using percent overall agreement and Fleiss’s kappa coefficient. Results The study aimed to test the consistency of the criteria, and despite being the first time the criteria were used, a moderate interrater agreement was achieved. The lowest agreement was observed for the effectiveness and efficiency sub-criteria group. Challenges identified with the scoring process were due to the descriptive 1 to 5 scale and the varying specificity of the criteria. The results showed that studying consistency between evaluators can highlight areas for improvement or adjustment in assessment criteria and enhance the quality of the assessment instrument. Conclusions This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the Slovenian “Criteria for assessing public health interventions for the purpose of identifying and selecting good practices”, which was found to offer valuable insights for various stakeholders. To enhance the quality of best practice assessments, the study suggests exploring opportunities for involving policy makers in the assessment process. Such collaboration between researchers, practitioners, and decision-makers can lead to significant improvements in the production and application of public health research.

show abstract

European public health best practice portal - process and criteria for best practice assessment

Cited by 9 publications

References 3 publications

Health promotion and disease prevention registries in the EU: a cross country comparison

Health promotion and disease prevention registries in the EU: a cross country comparison

Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Registries in the E.U.: A cross country comparison

Evaluator’s alignment as an important indicator of reliability of assessment procedure for recognizing the good practice in public health: piloting newly developed criteria.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About