McEwan R T
Newcastle upon Tyne Health Authority, Shieldfield Health Centre.
J Adv Nurs. 1989 Feb;14(2):103-10. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.1989.tb00907.x.
In evaluating a health service, individuals will give differing accounts of its performance, according to their experiences of the service, and the evaluative perspective they adopt. The value of a service may also change through time, and according to the particular part of the service studied. Traditional health care evaluations have generally not accounted for this variability because of the approaches used. Studies evaluating screening or assessment programmes for the elderly have focused on programme effectiveness and efficiency, using relatively inflexible quantitative methods. Evaluative approaches must reflect the complexity of health service provision, and methods must vary to suit the particular research objective. Under these circumstances, this paper presents the case for the use of multiple triangulation in evaluative research, where differing methods and perspectives are combined in one study. Emphasis is placed on the applications and benefits of subjectivist approaches in evaluation. An example of combined methods is provided in the form of an evaluation of the Newcastle Care Plan for the Elderly.
在评估一项医疗服务时,根据个人对该服务的体验以及他们所采用的评估视角,人们会对其表现给出不同的描述。一项服务的价值也可能随时间变化,并且取决于所研究的服务的特定部分。由于所采用的方法,传统的医疗保健评估通常没有考虑到这种变异性。评估老年人筛查或评估项目的研究一直侧重于项目的有效性和效率,采用的是相对僵化的定量方法。评估方法必须反映医疗服务提供的复杂性,并且方法必须因应特定的研究目标而有所不同。在这种情况下,本文阐述了在评估研究中使用多重三角互证法的理由,即在一项研究中结合不同的方法和视角。重点在于主观主义方法在评估中的应用和益处。以对纽卡斯尔老年人护理计划的评估为例,提供了一种综合方法。