Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Equity Theory01:26

Equity Theory

Equity theory explains how our sense of fairness influences the dynamics of close relationships. Rooted in social psychology, the theory posits that individuals evaluate fairness by comparing the ratio of their contributions to the rewards they receive. Relationship satisfaction is highest when these ratios are perceived as balanced between partners, promoting mutual reciprocity and a sense of justice.Equity vs. Equality in RelationshipsEquity is distinct from equality. Fairness does not...
Surveys02:16

Surveys

Often, psychologists develop surveys as a means of gathering data. Surveys are lists of questions to be answered by research participants, and can be delivered as paper-and-pencil questionnaires, administered electronically, or conducted verbally. Generally, the survey itself can be completed in a short time, and the ease of administering a survey makes it easy to collect data from a large number of people.
Halo Effect01:27

Halo Effect

The halo effect is a cognitive bias in which an individual's overall impression influences judgments about their specific traits. This psychological phenomenon leads people to associate positive characteristics with those they perceive as generally good and negative characteristics with those they view as bad. This effect is particularly influential in social perception, professional evaluations, and decision-making processes.The Psychological Basis of the Halo EffectThe halo effect is rooted...
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding01:25

Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding

Confounding is a critical issue in epidemiological studies, often leading to misleading conclusions about associations between exposures and outcomes. It occurs when the relationship between the exposure and the outcome is mixed with the effects of other factors that influence the outcome. Given that, addressing confounding is of high importance for drawing accurate inferences in research.
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Solution Equilibrium and Saturation01:59

Solution Equilibrium and Saturation

Imagine adding a small amount of sugar to a glass of water, stirring until all the sugar has dissolved, and then adding a bit more. You can repeat this process until the sugar concentration of the solution reaches its natural limit, a limit determined primarily by the relative strengths of the solute-solute, solute-solvent, and solvent-solvent attractive forces. You can be certain that you have reached this limit because, no matter how long you stir the solution, undissolved sugar remains. The...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Evaluating the quality of research co-production: Research Quality Plus for Co-Production (RQ + 4 Co-Pro).

Health research policy and systems·2023
Same author

Back to the future: Are we trapped in our past?

Evaluation and program planning·2023
Same author

Improving WHO's understanding of WHO guideline uptake and use in Member States: a scoping review.

Health research policy and systems·2022
Same author

Evaluating research co-production: protocol for the Research Quality Plus for Co-Production (RQ+ 4 Co-Pro) framework.

Implementation science communications·2022
Same author

Walking gently: some cautions in developing a procedural view of knowledge.

Journal of epidemiology and community health·2012
Same author

Retrospective evaluation of UNICEF's ACSD programme.

Lancet (London, England)·2010

Related Experiment Videos

Asking questions in the solution space: methodological issues in evaluating equity.

Fred Carden1

  • 1International Development Research Centre, Canada. fcarden@idrc.ca

Evaluation and Program Planning
|April 10, 2012
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Improving health equity interventions requires adaptive evaluation methods. Clarity in values and purpose are essential for effective health equity policy and systems-level reform.

Related Experiment Videos

Area of Science:

  • Public Health
  • Health Services Research
  • Health Equity Studies

Background:

  • Evaluation of health equity interventions faces methodological challenges.
  • Current evaluation approaches may not adequately capture the dynamic nature of health systems.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To provide an overview of methodological issues in evaluating health equity interventions.
  • To advocate for adaptive and future-oriented evaluation approaches.
  • To emphasize the importance of purpose and values in guiding evaluation methods.

Main Methods:

  • Conceptual analysis of evaluation methodologies for health equity.
  • Argument for a systems-level perspective in health equity evaluation.
  • Proposal for rethinking and reforming health equity evaluation.

Main Results:

  • Evaluation can be a key tool for health equity if it adopts adaptive strategies.
  • Methodological choices in evaluation must be driven by clearly defined purposes and values.
  • Current evaluation practices need reform to better reflect complex health systems.

Conclusions:

  • A futures orientation and adaptive methods are crucial for effective health equity evaluation.
  • Systems-level evaluation can inform policy reshaping for better health equity outcomes.
  • Reformed evaluation practices are needed to enhance the adaptability and realism of health equity assessments.