Strengthening evaluation through interactive problem structuring: A case study of hospital care after attempted suicide

Moret-Hartman, Margriet; Reuzel, Rob; Grin, John; Kramers, Cornelis; Wilt, Gert Jan van der

doi:10.1177/1356389010392203

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Within this paradigm, there is a growing toolkit that offers analytical support for facilitating participatory processes of joint sense-making (e.g. Moret-Hartman et al, 2011; Hermans et al, 2012). Besides support for participatory constructivist processes, also analytical tools and methods are available that help to understand processes among multiple actors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The usefulness of game theory as a method for policy evaluation

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most of today's public policies are formulated and implemented in multi-actor networks. Game theory has long been around as a method that supports a careful analysis of interaction processes among actors. So far, it has not been widely applied in the evaluation field. Hence, questions regarding the usefulness of game theory as an evaluation method remain pertinent. This article addresses these questions, based on a review of literature on evaluations and game theory, and a case where game theory was used in an evaluation of coastal policy implementation in the Netherlands. The results suggest that game theory can help to open up the 'black-box' of policy implementation, when implementation depends on the actions of several interdependent actors. This potential lies not so much in 'hard' mathematical uses, but in the use of game theory as a formal modeling approach that adds structure and rigour to the study of social processes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The usefulness of game theory as a method for policy evaluation

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For the interviews, we used fourth-generation evaluation methodology with some minor modi cations (20)(21)(22). All participants were interviewed twice: in the rst round they were asked to share their views on the new endoscopic device and the quality of hospital care, and in the second round they were invited to respond to rival claims of other participants.…”

Section: Data Collection Methods 2: Interviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Participatory Methods Used In The Evaluation Of Medical Devices: A Comparison Of Focus groups, Interviews, And A Survey

Woudstra¹,

Tummers

Klijn

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Stakeholder engagement in evaluation of medical devices is crucial for aligning devices with stakeholders’ views, needs, and values. Methods for these engagements have however not been compared to analyse their relative merits for medical device evaluation. Therefore, we systematically compared these three methods in terms of themes, interaction, and time-investment. Methods We compared focus groups, interviews and an online survey in a case-study on minimally invasive endoscopy-guided surgery for patients with intracerebral haemorrhage. The focus groups and interviews featured two rounds, one explorative focussing on individual perspectives, and one interactive focussing on the exchange of perspectives between participants. The comparison between methods was made in terms of number and content of themes, how participants interact, and hours invested by all researchers. Results The focus groups generated 34 themes, the interviews 58, and the survey 42. Various improvements for the assessment of the surgical procedure were only discussed in the interviews. In focus groups, participants were inclined to emphasise agreement and support, whereas the interviews consisted of questions and answers. The total time investment for researchers of focus groups was 95 hours, of interviews 315 hours, and survey 81 hours. Conclusions Interviewing is the most appropriate method for understanding stakeholder views, since interviews provide a scope and depth of information that is not generated by other methods. Focus groups are useful to rapidly bring views together. Surveys enable a quick exploration. Researchers should account for these methodological differences and select the method that is suitable for their research aim.

show abstract

“…Boundary making is an inherently social process. This highlights the important role of stakeholder involvement in problem definition—“The quality of an evaluation largely depends on the quality of the underlying problem definition and the quality of the problem definition often improves as stakeholder involvement increases” (Moret-Hartman, Reuzel, Grin, Kramers, & Van der Wilt, 2011, p. 37). Moret-Hartman and colleagues developed and implemented an interactive “fourth-generation” approach to problem structuring through which interviewees were asked for their own views and then asked to comment on the responses of others and were then themselves reinterviewed, all to achieve a more interactive and iterative version of problem structuring.…”

Section: Problem Definition In the Evaluation Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

What’s the Problem Represented to Be? Problem Definition Critique as a Tool for Evaluative Thinking

Archibald

2019

American Journal of Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Problem definition in program planning and evaluation is rarely problematized. In this article, I discuss why the lack of problem problematization is itself problematic—in other words, why treating problems as self-evident can pose a risk for evaluation practice. Then, to help avoid such risks, I suggest Carol Bacchi’s “What’s the Problem Represented to Be?” approach as a useful tool to focus evaluative thinking on the frequently tacit step of problem definition. Bacchi’s approach, informed by feminist and poststructuralist epistemologies, is designed to facilitate critical interrogation of policies and programs, focusing on the social and value-laden ways in which problems are initially defined. I propose that evaluators can fruitfully use Bacchi’s tool to promote evaluative thinking about the assumptions that inhere problem representation and thus can help promote better evaluation.

show abstract

Strengthening evaluation through interactive problem structuring: A case study of hospital care after attempted suicide

Cited by 5 publications

References 20 publications

The usefulness of game theory as a method for policy evaluation

The usefulness of game theory as a method for policy evaluation

Participatory Methods Used In The Evaluation Of Medical Devices: A Comparison Of Focus groups, Interviews, And A Survey

What’s the Problem Represented to Be? Problem Definition Critique as a Tool for Evaluative Thinking

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About