2000
DOI: 10.1016/s0738-3991(99)00035-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluating health promotion: a tale of three errors

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
59
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 107 publications
(59 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
59
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, mixed methods are more helpful in evidencing effectiveness of complex interventions (Tones, 2000), and in illuminating the complex links between interventions and outcomes (Victora, Habicht & Bryce, 2004).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, mixed methods are more helpful in evidencing effectiveness of complex interventions (Tones, 2000), and in illuminating the complex links between interventions and outcomes (Victora, Habicht & Bryce, 2004).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, it will increase insight into cultural differences in the effectiveness of strategies. Several authors have called for a more detailed description of intervention methodologies and strategies (Hardeman et al, 2000;Tones, 2000;Bartholomew et al, 2001 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two concepts coexist as regard the evaluation of health interventions; each is justified by the type of approach used in the program [15]. The first school uses the experimental method which is based on epidemiological data and which compares two different populations.…”
Section: On the Choice Of Evaluation Types For The Interventionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It rather advocates a democratically determined efficiency, i.e. by a jury comprising funders, public, participants and experts [15]. If the first approach is said to be a traditional positivist one and covers the field of health education, the second is postmodern and pertains to health promotion [16].…”
Section: On the Choice Of Evaluation Types For The Interventionmentioning
confidence: 99%