PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16969998

Preffi 2.0- a quality assessment tool.

Abstract

The findings of many meta-studies into the effects of health promotion programmes indicate that there is still much room for improvement in the quality of these programmes. Insights gained from research are rarely applied in practice. Practitioners and policymakers often find it hard to assess the value of the many and sometimes contradictory research findings, partly because the necessary contextual information is usually lacking. Practical considerations force them to respond to specific problems at short notice in the form of programmes that are as effective as possible. Hence, effective health promotion requires not only the dissemination of effective programmes but also insights into principles of effectiveness and the way professionals use these insights. It is against this background that the Netherlands Institute for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention (NIGZ) has developed and implemented the Preffi instrument. Preffi consists of a set of guidelines with items relevant to the effectiveness of health promotion and prevention projects, reflecting scientific and practical knowledge about effect predictors. This article describes the systematic, seven-step development process of the second version of the instrument, Preffi 2.0, a process in which scientists and practitioners were closely involved throughout. The article also describes the Preffi model and its scoring method. The draft version of Preffi 2.0 was tested for usefulness among 35 experienced practitioners from a range of health promotion institutes. They were asked to use the draft version to assess two project descriptions and to comment on their experiences using Preffi 2.0. They gave the instrument an average overall mark of 7.7 on a scale of 10, and the large majority of them evaluated the instrument as valuable, complete, clear, well-organised and innovative. The findings of this trial implementation were used to construct the definitive version of Preffi 2.0. To an experienced user, applying Preffi to assess a project takes less than an hour. Preffi is used as a diagnostic quality assurance instrument at various stages of a project, either to critically evaluate one's own project or to comment on projects proposed by others. Assessing other people's projects may be difficult if the necessary information is lacking or unclear. A supplementary discussion with the project manager is always required. Users have commented that applying Preffi to a project yields a balanced and useful assessment, as well as a clear overview of points in the project that could be improved.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Gerard R M Molleman, Machteld A Ploeg, Clemens M H Hosman, Louk H M Peters. 2006. Preffi 2.0- a quality assessment tool.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16969998/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Extending basic principles of measurement models to the design and validation of Patient Reported Outcomes.

A recently published article by the Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust presents guidelines for selecting and evaluating health status and health-related quality of life measures used in health outcomes research. In their article, they propose a number of validation and performance criteria with which to evaluate such self-report measures. We provide an alternate, yet complementary, perspective by extending the types of measurement models which are available to the instrument designer. During psychometric development or selection of a Patient Reported Outcome measure it is necessary to determine which, of the five types of measurement models, the measure is based on; 1) a Multiple Effect Indicator model, 2) a Multiple Cause Indicator model, 3) a Single Item Effect Indicator model, 4) a Single Item Cause Indicator model, or 5) a Mixed Multiple Indicator model. Specification of the measurement model has a major influence on decisions about item and scale design, the appropriate application of statistical validation methods, and the suitability of the resulting measure for a particular use in clinical and population-based outcomes research activities.

Guidelines as Topic↗

International guidance on the establishment of quality assurance programmes for radioactivity measurement in nuclear medicine.

A new guidance document for the implementation of quality assurance (QA) programmes for nuclear medicine radioactivity measurement, produced by the International Atomic Energy Agency, is described. The proposed programme is based on the principles of ISO 17025 and will enable laboratories, particularly in developing countries, to provide consistent, safe and effective radioactivity measurement services to the nuclear medicine community.

Guidelines as Topic↗

A cautionary tale.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Guidelines as Topic↗