Instructions
The final step with any population health issue is evaluating the intervention. What evidence or data will you be able to evaluate to know if the intervention you selected positively impacted the problem/issue?
In addition to the evaluation it is also essential to consider the costs involved relative to the benefits of the intervention.
Identification of a population health problem typically arises from population data. The data can be generated locally by a specific practice, health care system, public health system, or through regional or state data aggregation, such as the County Health Rankings. Once data exposes a health problem, interventions can be designed to address it. If the intervention has an effect, that effect should be reflected in the post-intervention population data. An evaluation of the intervention might involve a review of the population data over time for trends indicating any change (or no change) in the problem.
Directions
The Part 3 Evaluation and Cost-Benefit Discussion assignment is a formal, scholarly paper written in APA (7th ed.) format.
A typical evaluation/cost-benefit paper (excluding the title page and references) is about 3-5 pages long.
The paper should address the following:
- A title that reflects the problem or issue (the title should not be “Population Health Evaluation Paper”).
- A brief description of the health risk or health-related problem/issue you identified from review of the data and the intervention that you selected to address the problem (these are the same elements that you discussed in your Part 1 and Part 2 Population Health Intervention Proposal papers). This could be accomplished in a brief, introductory paragraph.
- A description of how outcomes of your selected intervention will be evaluated. In other words, what outcome measures will be able to provide you with adequate information to determine whether or not your selected intervention was effective?
- Below are some examples of ways you may wish to approach or describe how you would evaluate the intervention discussed in your Part 2 paper:
- A process evaluation (e.g. how many patients are participating in the intervention; example – how many got their flu shots? or participated in the screening event? etc.).
- An outcome evaluation (e.g. reporting on whether the identified health problem/issue increased, decreased, or stayed the same, etc.)
- A direct measure (e.g. the patients/community members learned how to . . . [do what? participate in what? etc.] ).
- An indirect measure (e.g. after initiating the online portal, fewer patients are using [other services]).
- Below are some examples of ways you may wish to approach or describe how you would evaluate the intervention discussed in your Part 2 paper:
- Include a cost-benefit analysis for the intervention, weighing potential costs associated with the intervention against potential benefits derived by the patients/community members from engaging with the intervention, etc.). While this need not be a full budget discussion, keep in mind you are to produce doctoral level scholarship. Ensure your discussion includes information about human, capital, and material resources where appropriate.
- Sources of information and evidence are identified appropriately with in-text citations and references constructed consistent with the 7th ed. APA guidelines.