The role of theory-based outcome frameworks in program evaluation: Considering the case of contribution analysis

Medical Teacher

Volumn 37, Issue 11, 2015, Pages 979-982

  Dauphinee, W Dale ^a,b  

^a FOUNDATION FOR ADVANCEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH   (United States)

^b MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EDUCATION; MEDICAL PROFESSION; PROGRAM EVALUATION; THEORETICAL MODEL;

HEALTH OCCUPATIONS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PROGRAM EVALUATION;

EID: 84946848068     PISSN: 0142159X     EISSN: 1466187X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2015.1087484     Document Type: Review

References (18)

1. Dauphinee WD. 2012. Educators must consider patient outcomes when assessing the impact of clinical training. Med Educ 46(1):13-20.
2. Glouberman S, Zimmerman. 2002. Complicated and complex systems: What would successful reform of medicare look like? Commission on the future of health care in Canada. Discussion Paper 8. Available from http://www.hc-sc.ca/english/pdf/romanow/pdfs/8-Globerman-E.pdf.
3. Moreau K, Eady K. 2015. Connecting medical education to patient outcomes: The promise of contribution analysis. Med Teach 37(11): 1060-1062.
4. Mayne J 2001. Addressing attribution through contributions analysis: Using performance measures sensibly. Can J Program Eval 16(1):1-24.
5. Mayne J. 2012. Contribution analysis: Coming of age? Evaluation 18(3):270-280.
6. Nakrosis V. 2014. Theory-based evaluation of capacity-building interventions. Evaluation 20(1):134-150.
7. Norcini J, Boulet J, Dauphinee D, Anderson S, Opalik A, Krantz I. 2010. Foreign born international med school grads outperform U.S. Counterparts on some mortality measures. Health Affairs 29(8):1461-1468.
8. Papadakis MA, Hodgson CS, Teherani A, Kohatsu ND. 2004. Unprofessional behavior in medical school is associated with subsequent disciplinary action by a state medical board. Acad Med 79(3):244-249.
9. Papadakis MA, Teherani A, Banach MA, Knettler TR, Rattner SL, Stern D, Veloski JJ, Hodgson CS. 2005. Disciplinary action by medical boards and prior behavior in medical school. N Eng J Med 353(25):2673-2682.
10. Pawson S. 2006. 'Simple principles for the evaluation of complex programmes'. In: Killoran A, Swann C, Kelly M, editors. Public health evidence: Tackling health inequalities. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp 228-238.
11. Rogers PJ. 2009. Using programme theory to evaluate complicated and complex aspects of interventions. Evaluation 14(1):29-48.
12. Stacey RD. 1996. Complexity and creativity in organizations. Chapter 1: Organizations are complex adaptive systems. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. pp 23-46.
13. Stakes RE. 2010. Qualitative research. Studying how things work. Chapter 1: Qualitative research: How things work. New York: The Guilford Press. pp 11-31.
14. Tamblyn R, Abrahamowicz, M, Dauphinee WD, Hanley JA, Norcini J, Girard N, Grand'Maison P, Brailovsky C. 2002. Association between licensure examination scores and practice in primary care. JAMA 288(23):3019-3026.
15. Tamblyn R, Abrahamowicz M, Dauphinee D, Wenghofer E, Jacques A, Klass D, Smee S, Eguale T, Winslade N, Girard N, et al. 2010. Influence of physicians' management and communication ability on patients' persistence with antihypertensive medication. Arch Intern Med 170(12):1064-1072.
16. Van der Vleuten CPM, Schuwirth LWT, Driessen EW, Dijkstra J, Tigelaar D, Baartman LKJ, Van Tratwijk J. 2012. A model for programmatic assessment fit for purpose. Med Teach 34:205-214.
17. Weiss CH. 1997. Theory-based evaluation: Past, present, and future. New directions for evaluation 76:41-55.
18. Wenghofer E, Klass D, Abrahamowicz M, Dauphinee D, Jacques A, Smee S, Blackmore D, Winslade N, Reidel K, Bartman I, et al. 2009. Physician scores on national qualifying examinations predict quality of care in future practice. Med Educ 43(12):1166-1173.