The use of evaluation methods for the overall assessment of health policy: potential and limitations

Abstract

Background The implementation of public policies requires special attention from public authorities to ensure their transparency, effectiveness and efficiency. For this reason, efforts to evaluate the abovementioned politics gained attention and importance. Similar processes, by their very nature, are also noticeable in the area of health policy, however, the nature of the solutions used raises questions about the extent to which they allow to capture the assessed phenomenon in a holistic way. The current approach to the problem of evaluating health policy shows a tendency to break down this phenomenon into components including policies, programs or projects. The purpose of this publication was to assess the main methodological approaches used in evaluation studies in terms of their usefulness and limitations in conducting overall assessment of health policy. Main body The publication divides evaluation methods based on three main criteria identified in the literature—time, purpose and scope of evaluation. Methodological approaches to evaluation activities detailed on this basis are discussed from the point of view of their characteristics, usefulness and limitations in the creation of comprehensive health policy assessments. The growing awareness of the need for a different approach to evaluation, which was confirmed by the course of the discourse on evaluation in public health, was also pointed out. Conclusion Given the complexity of the matter making up the health policy, attempts aimed at its overall assessment should be based on an approach integrating many approaches, while ensuring coordination of evaluation activities that should be subject to common assumptions.

Summative evaluation of implementation of Jordan's national anti‐corruption strategy, 2013–2017, in the perspective of public choice theory

“…The execution of public policy requires great attention from policymakers to ensure its effectiveness and efficiency. For this reason, using feedback to assess public policies has gained importance (Kaczmarek & Romaniuk, 2020; Ropohl & Aufschnaiter, 2021). The establishment of evaluation studies to provide a distinction between formative and summative evaluation dates back 50 years.…”

Strengthening causal inference from randomised controlled trials of complex interventions

“…RCTs prioritise ensuring internal validity and are seen in medicine as the standard for establishing quality clinical evidence 2. To be useful as a source of evidence for public policy, RCTs of complex multicomponent interventions must fully embrace this complexity by assessing the impact on all relevant outcomes 2–6…”

“…Among possible evaluation study designs, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are often preferred because they can mitigate problems of confounding and selection bias 1. RCTs are not always appropriate or achievable to evaluate the impact of complex interventions, and evidence from other study designs may be needed to evaluate these interventions 2–6. Our study, however, focuses on the use of RCTs to evaluate complex interventions.…”

Analysing sentiment change detection of Covid-19 tweets

“…Measuring health policy is a well-known problem, and there is no universal measure or strategy since it is related to the nature and type of health problem that legislation, regulation, and common practices are trying to address [ 10 – 12 ]. The common timeframe for evaluating these strategies may vary from months to years.…”