Nastasi Bonnie K, Hitchcock John
Department of Psychology, 2007 Percival Stern Hall, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA 70130, USA.
Am J Community Psychol. 2009 Jun;43(3-4):360-76. doi: 10.1007/s10464-009-9239-7.
This article uses the Comprehensive Mixed-Methods Participatory Evaluation (CMMPE; Nastasi and Hitchcock Transforming school mental health services: Population-based approaches to promoting the competency and wellness of children, Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press with National Association of School Psychologists 2008; Nastasi et al. School-based mental health services: creating comprehensive and culturally specific programs. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association 2004) model as a framework for addressing the multiplicity of evaluation decisions and complex nature of questions related to program success in multilevel interventions. CMMPE defines program success in terms of acceptability, integrity, social or cultural validity, outcomes (impact), sustainability and institutionalization, thus broadening the traditional notions of program outcomes. The authors use CMMPE and an example of a community-based multilevel sexual risk prevention program with multiple outcomes to discuss challenges of evaluating multilevel interventions. The sexual risk program exemplifies what Schensul and Trickett (this issue) characterize as multilevel intervention-multilevel evaluation (M-M), with both intervention and evaluation at community, health practitioner, and patient levels. The illustration provides the context for considering several challenges related to M-M designs: feasibility of randomized controlled trials within community-based multilevel intervention; acceptability and social or cultural validity of evaluation procedures; implementer, recipient, and contextual variations in program success; interactions among levels of the intervention; unanticipated changes or conditions; multiple indicators of program success; engaging multiple stakeholders in a participatory process; and evaluating sustainability and institutionalization. The complexity of multilevel intervention and evaluation designs challenges traditional notions of evaluation research and experimental designs. Overcoming these challenges is critical to effective translation of research to practice in psychology and related disciplines.
本文采用综合混合方法参与式评估(CMMPE;纳斯塔西和希区柯克《转变学校心理健康服务:促进儿童能力与健康的基于人群的方法》,加利福尼亚州千橡市:科温出版社与美国学校心理学家协会,2008年;纳斯塔西等人《基于学校的心理健康服务:创建全面且具有文化特异性的项目》,华盛顿特区:美国心理学会,2004年)模型作为框架,以应对评估决策的多样性以及与多层次干预中项目成功相关问题的复杂性。CMMPE从可接受性、完整性、社会或文化效度、结果(影响)、可持续性和制度化等方面定义项目成功,从而拓宽了传统的项目结果概念。作者运用CMMPE以及一个具有多种结果的基于社区的多层次性风险预防项目实例,来讨论评估多层次干预的挑战。性风险项目体现了申苏尔和特里克特(本期)所描述的多层次干预 - 多层次评估(M - M),在社区、健康从业者和患者层面都有干预和评估。该实例为思考与M - M设计相关的几个挑战提供了背景:基于社区的多层次干预中随机对照试验的可行性;评估程序的可接受性和社会或文化效度;项目成功方面实施者、接受者和背景的差异;干预各层面之间的相互作用;意外变化或情况;项目成功的多个指标;让多个利益相关者参与参与式过程;以及评估可持续性和制度化。多层次干预和评估设计的复杂性对评估研究和实验设计的传统观念构成了挑战。克服这些挑战对于将心理学及相关学科的研究有效转化为实践至关重要。