Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Health Research Policy and Systems 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research

Designing evaluation studies to optimally inform policy: what factors do policy-makers in China consider when making resource allocation decisions on healthcare worker training programmes?

Authors: Shishi Wu, Helena Legido-Quigley, Julia Spencer, Richard James Coker, Mishal Sameer Khan

Published in: Health Research Policy and Systems | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In light of the gap in evidence to inform future resource allocation decisions about healthcare provider (HCP) training in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), and the considerable donor investments being made towards training interventions, evaluation studies that are optimally designed to inform local policy-makers are needed. The aim of our study is to understand what features of HCP training evaluation studies are important for decision-making by policy-makers in LMICs. We investigate the extent to which evaluations based on the widely used Kirkpatrick model – focusing on direct outcomes of training, namely reaction of trainees, learning, behaviour change and improvements in programmatic health indicators – align with policy-makers’ evidence needs for resource allocation decisions. We use China as a case study where resource allocation decisions about potential scale-up (using domestic funding) are being made about an externally funded pilot HCP training programme.

Methods

Qualitative data were collected from high-level officials involved in resource allocation at the national and provincial level in China through ten face-to-face, in-depth interviews and two focus group discussions consisting of ten participants each. Data were analysed manually using an interpretive thematic analysis approach.

Results

Our study indicates that Chinese officials not only consider information about the direct outcomes of a training programme, as captured in the Kirkpatrick model, but also need information on the resources required to implement the training, the wider or indirect impacts of training, and the sustainability and scalability to other settings within the country. In addition to considering findings presented in evaluation studies, we found that Chinese policy-makers pay close attention to whether the evaluations were robust and to the composition of the evaluation team.

Conclusions

Our qualitative study indicates that training programme evaluations that focus narrowly on direct training outcomes may not provide sufficient information for policy-makers to make decisions on future training programmes. Based on our findings, we have developed an evidence-based framework, which incorporates but expands beyond the Kirkpatrick model, to provide conceptual and practical guidance that aids in the design of training programme evaluations better suited to meet the information needs of policy-makers and to inform policy decisions.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Lindblom C, Cohen D. Usable Knowledge: Social Science and Social Problem Solving. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1979. Lindblom C, Cohen D. Usable Knowledge: Social Science and Social Problem Solving. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1979.
2.
go back to reference Hyder AA, Corluka A, Winch PJ, El-Shinnawy A, Ghassany H, Malekafzali H, Lim MK, Mfutso-Bengo J, Segura E, Ghaffar A. National policy-makers speak out: are researchers giving them what they need? Health Policy Plan. 2011;26:73–82.CrossRefPubMed Hyder AA, Corluka A, Winch PJ, El-Shinnawy A, Ghassany H, Malekafzali H, Lim MK, Mfutso-Bengo J, Segura E, Ghaffar A. National policy-makers speak out: are researchers giving them what they need? Health Policy Plan. 2011;26:73–82.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Weiss C. The many meanings of research utilization. Public Adm Rev. 1979;39:426–31.CrossRef Weiss C. The many meanings of research utilization. Public Adm Rev. 1979;39:426–31.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Hawkins B, Parkhurst J. The ‘good governance' of evidence in health policy. Evid Policy. 2016;12:575–92.CrossRef Hawkins B, Parkhurst J. The ‘good governance' of evidence in health policy. Evid Policy. 2016;12:575–92.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Aaserud M, Lewin S, Innvaer S. Translating research into policy and practice in developing countries: a case study of magnesium sulphate for pre-eclampsia. BMC Health Serv Res. 2005;5:68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Aaserud M, Lewin S, Innvaer S. Translating research into policy and practice in developing countries: a case study of magnesium sulphate for pre-eclampsia. BMC Health Serv Res. 2005;5:68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference Albert M, Fretheim A, Maiga D. Factors influencing the utilization of research findings by health policy-makers in a developing country: the selection of Mali’s essential medicines. Health Res Policy Syst. 2007;5:2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Albert M, Fretheim A, Maiga D. Factors influencing the utilization of research findings by health policy-makers in a developing country: the selection of Mali’s essential medicines. Health Res Policy Syst. 2007;5:2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Hennik M, Stephenson R. Using research to inform health policy: barriers and strategies in developing countries. J Health Commun. 2005;10:163–80.CrossRef Hennik M, Stephenson R. Using research to inform health policy: barriers and strategies in developing countries. J Health Commun. 2005;10:163–80.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Trostle J, Bronfman M, Langer A. How do researchers influence decision-makers? Case studies of Mexican policies. Health Policy Plan. 1999;14:103–14.CrossRefPubMed Trostle J, Bronfman M, Langer A. How do researchers influence decision-makers? Case studies of Mexican policies. Health Policy Plan. 1999;14:103–14.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Lavis JDH, Oxman A, Denis JL, Golden-Biddle K, Ferlie E. Towards systematic reviews that inform health care management and policy-making. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10:35–48.CrossRefPubMed Lavis JDH, Oxman A, Denis JL, Golden-Biddle K, Ferlie E. Towards systematic reviews that inform health care management and policy-making. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10:35–48.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Innvaer S, Vist G, Trommald M, Oxman A. Health policy-makers' perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2002;7:239–44.CrossRefPubMed Innvaer S, Vist G, Trommald M, Oxman A. Health policy-makers' perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2002;7:239–44.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Dobbins M, Ciliska D, Cockerill R, Barnsley J, DiCenso A. A framework for the dissemination and utilization of research for health-care policy and practice. Online J Knowl Synth Nurs. 2002;9:7.PubMed Dobbins M, Ciliska D, Cockerill R, Barnsley J, DiCenso A. A framework for the dissemination and utilization of research for health-care policy and practice. Online J Knowl Synth Nurs. 2002;9:7.PubMed
12.
go back to reference Kouri D. Introductory Module: Introduction to Decision Theory and Practice. Saskatoon: HEALNet; 1997. Kouri D. Introductory Module: Introduction to Decision Theory and Practice. Saskatoon: HEALNet; 1997.
13.
go back to reference Hanney S, Gonzalez-Block M, Buxton M, Kogan M. The utilisation of health research in policy-making: concepts, examples and methods of assessment. Health Res Policy Syst. 2003;1:2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hanney S, Gonzalez-Block M, Buxton M, Kogan M. The utilisation of health research in policy-making: concepts, examples and methods of assessment. Health Res Policy Syst. 2003;1:2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Schneider A, Ingram H. Policy Design for Democracy. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas; 1997. Schneider A, Ingram H. Policy Design for Democracy. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas; 1997.
16.
go back to reference World Health Organization. The World Health Report 2006: Working Together For Health. Geneva: WHO; 2006. World Health Organization. The World Health Report 2006: Working Together For Health. Geneva: WHO; 2006.
17.
go back to reference Figueroa-Munoz J, Palmer K, Dal Poz M, Blanc L, Bergström K, Raviglione M. The health workforce crisis in TB control: a report from high-burden countries. Hum Resour Health. 2005;3:2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Figueroa-Munoz J, Palmer K, Dal Poz M, Blanc L, Bergström K, Raviglione M. The health workforce crisis in TB control: a report from high-burden countries. Hum Resour Health. 2005;3:2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
19.
go back to reference Bowser D, Sparkes SP, Mitchell A, Bossert TJ, Barnighausen T, Gedik G, Atun R. Global Fund investments in human resources for health: innovation and missed opportunities for health systems strengthening. Health Policy Plan. 2014;29:986–97.CrossRefPubMed Bowser D, Sparkes SP, Mitchell A, Bossert TJ, Barnighausen T, Gedik G, Atun R. Global Fund investments in human resources for health: innovation and missed opportunities for health systems strengthening. Health Policy Plan. 2014;29:986–97.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Wu S, Roychowdhury I, Khan M. Evaluations of training programs to improve human resource capacity for HIV, malaria and TB control: a systematic review of methods applied and outcomes assessed. Trop Med Health. 2017;45:16.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Wu S, Roychowdhury I, Khan M. Evaluations of training programs to improve human resource capacity for HIV, malaria and TB control: a systematic review of methods applied and outcomes assessed. Trop Med Health. 2017;45:16.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
go back to reference World Health Organization. Evaluating Training in WHO. Geneva: WHO; 2010. World Health Organization. Evaluating Training in WHO. Geneva: WHO; 2010.
22.
go back to reference Kirkpatrick D. Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd edition). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers; 2006. Kirkpatrick D. Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd edition). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers; 2006.
23.
go back to reference Phillips PPJ. Symposium on the evaluation of training. Int J Train Dev. 2001;5:240–7.CrossRef Phillips PPJ. Symposium on the evaluation of training. Int J Train Dev. 2001;5:240–7.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Kraiger KFJ, Salas E. Application of cognitive, skill-based, and affective theories of learning outcomes to new methods of training evaluation. J Appl Psychol. 1993;78:311–28.CrossRef Kraiger KFJ, Salas E. Application of cognitive, skill-based, and affective theories of learning outcomes to new methods of training evaluation. J Appl Psychol. 1993;78:311–28.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Arthur WBW, Edens P, Bell S. Effectiveness of training in organizations: a meta-analysis of design and evaluation features. J Appl Psychol. 2003;88:234–45.CrossRefPubMed Arthur WBW, Edens P, Bell S. Effectiveness of training in organizations: a meta-analysis of design and evaluation features. J Appl Psychol. 2003;88:234–45.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Guskey T. Five Levels of Professional Development Evaluation: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL); 2002. Guskey T. Five Levels of Professional Development Evaluation: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL); 2002.
27.
go back to reference Kaufman R, Keller J, Watkins R. What works and what doesn't: evaluation beyond kirkpatrick. Perform Improv. 1996;35:8–12. Kaufman R, Keller J, Watkins R. What works and what doesn't: evaluation beyond kirkpatrick. Perform Improv. 1996;35:8–12.
28.
go back to reference Kearns P, Miller T. Measuring the Impact of Training and Development on the Bottom Line. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Financial Times Prentice Hall; 1997. Kearns P, Miller T. Measuring the Impact of Training and Development on the Bottom Line. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Financial Times Prentice Hall; 1997.
29.
go back to reference Hamblin AC. Evaluation and Control of Training. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Co.; 1974. Hamblin AC. Evaluation and Control of Training. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Co.; 1974.
30.
go back to reference Brauchle P, Schmidt K. Contemporary approaches for assessing outcomes on training, education, and HRD programs. J Ind Teach Educ. 2004;41:17. Brauchle P, Schmidt K. Contemporary approaches for assessing outcomes on training, education, and HRD programs. J Ind Teach Educ. 2004;41:17.
31.
go back to reference O'Malley G, Perdue T, Petracca F. A framework for outcome-level evaluation of in-service training of health care workers. Hum Resour Health. 2013;11:50.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral O'Malley G, Perdue T, Petracca F. A framework for outcome-level evaluation of in-service training of health care workers. Hum Resour Health. 2013;11:50.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
32.
go back to reference Alvarez K, Salas E, Garofano C. An integrated model of training evaluation and effectiveness. Hum Resour Dev Rev. 2004;3:385–416.CrossRef Alvarez K, Salas E, Garofano C. An integrated model of training evaluation and effectiveness. Hum Resour Dev Rev. 2004;3:385–416.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Bates R. A critical analysis of evaluation practice: the Kirkpatrick model and the principle of beneficence. Eval Program Planning. 2004;27:341–7.CrossRef Bates R. A critical analysis of evaluation practice: the Kirkpatrick model and the principle of beneficence. Eval Program Planning. 2004;27:341–7.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Naude CE, Zani B, Ongolo-Zogo P, Wiysonge CS, Dudley L, Kredo T, Garner P, Young T. Research evidence and policy: qualitative study in selected provinces in South Africa and Cameroon. Implement Sci. 2015;10:126.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Naude CE, Zani B, Ongolo-Zogo P, Wiysonge CS, Dudley L, Kredo T, Garner P, Young T. Research evidence and policy: qualitative study in selected provinces in South Africa and Cameroon. Implement Sci. 2015;10:126.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
35.
go back to reference Sackett PR, Mullen EJ. Beyond formal experimental design: towards an expanded view of the training evaluation process. Pers Psychol. 1993;46:613–28.CrossRef Sackett PR, Mullen EJ. Beyond formal experimental design: towards an expanded view of the training evaluation process. Pers Psychol. 1993;46:613–28.CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Hunter DJ. Relationship between evidence and policy: a case of evidence-based policy or policy-based evidence? Public Health. 2009;123:583–6.CrossRefPubMed Hunter DJ. Relationship between evidence and policy: a case of evidence-based policy or policy-based evidence? Public Health. 2009;123:583–6.CrossRefPubMed
38.
go back to reference Leir S, Parkhurst J. What is Good Evidence for Policy? London: London School of Hygiene and Tropical. Medicine. 2016; Leir S, Parkhurst J. What is Good Evidence for Policy? London: London School of Hygiene and Tropical. Medicine. 2016;
39.
go back to reference Hutchison C, Khan MS, Yoong J, Lin X, Coker RJ. Financial barriers and coping strategies: a qualitative study of accessing multidrug-resistant tuberculosis and tuberculosis care in Yunnan, China. BMC Public Health. 2017;17:221.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hutchison C, Khan MS, Yoong J, Lin X, Coker RJ. Financial barriers and coping strategies: a qualitative study of accessing multidrug-resistant tuberculosis and tuberculosis care in Yunnan, China. BMC Public Health. 2017;17:221.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
40.
go back to reference Ritchie J, Lewis J, Nicholls CM, Ormston R. Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2013. Ritchie J, Lewis J, Nicholls CM, Ormston R. Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2013.
41.
go back to reference Rice P, Ezzy D. Qualitative Research Methods: A Health Focus. Melbourne: Oxford University Press; 1999. Rice P, Ezzy D. Qualitative Research Methods: A Health Focus. Melbourne: Oxford University Press; 1999.
42.
go back to reference Boyatzis R. Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1998. Boyatzis R. Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1998.
43.
go back to reference Saldana J. The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2009. Saldana J. The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2009.
44.
go back to reference Glaser B, Strauss A. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine; 1967. Glaser B, Strauss A. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine; 1967.
45.
go back to reference Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19:349–57.CrossRefPubMed Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19:349–57.CrossRefPubMed
46.
go back to reference Bramley P. Evaluating Training Effectiveness. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill; 1996. Bramley P. Evaluating Training Effectiveness. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill; 1996.
47.
go back to reference Warr P, Bird M, Rackcam N. Evaluation of Management Training. London: Gower; 1978. Warr P, Bird M, Rackcam N. Evaluation of Management Training. London: Gower; 1978.
48.
go back to reference Foxon M. Evaluation of training and development programs: a review of the literature. Aust J Educ Technol. 1989;5:89–104. Foxon M. Evaluation of training and development programs: a review of the literature. Aust J Educ Technol. 1989;5:89–104.
49.
go back to reference Wu S, Roychowdhury I, Khan M. Evaluating the impact of healthcare provider training to improve tuberculosis management: a systematic review of methods and outcome indicators used. Int J Infect Dis. 2017;56:105–10.CrossRefPubMed Wu S, Roychowdhury I, Khan M. Evaluating the impact of healthcare provider training to improve tuberculosis management: a systematic review of methods and outcome indicators used. Int J Infect Dis. 2017;56:105–10.CrossRefPubMed
51.
go back to reference Shediac-Rizkallah MC, Bone LR. Planning for the sustainability of community-based health programs: conceptual frameworks and future directions for research, practice and policy. Health Educ Res. 1998;13:87–108.CrossRefPubMed Shediac-Rizkallah MC, Bone LR. Planning for the sustainability of community-based health programs: conceptual frameworks and future directions for research, practice and policy. Health Educ Res. 1998;13:87–108.CrossRefPubMed
52.
go back to reference Hyder AA, Bloom G, Leach M, Syed SB, Peters DH. Future Health Systems: Innovations for Equity. Exploring health systems research and its influence on policy processes in low income countries. BMC Public Health. 2007;7:309.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hyder AA, Bloom G, Leach M, Syed SB, Peters DH. Future Health Systems: Innovations for Equity. Exploring health systems research and its influence on policy processes in low income countries. BMC Public Health. 2007;7:309.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
54.
go back to reference Smithson J. Using and analysing focus groups: limitations and possibilities. Int J Social Research Methodology. 2000;3:103–19.CrossRef Smithson J. Using and analysing focus groups: limitations and possibilities. Int J Social Research Methodology. 2000;3:103–19.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Designing evaluation studies to optimally inform policy: what factors do policy-makers in China consider when making resource allocation decisions on healthcare worker training programmes?
Authors
Shishi Wu
Helena Legido-Quigley
Julia Spencer
Richard James Coker
Mishal Sameer Khan
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Health Research Policy and Systems / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1478-4505
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-018-0292-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Health Research Policy and Systems 1/2018 Go to the issue