Dataset Information

Evaluating the impact of integrated development: are we asking the right questions? A systematic review.

ABSTRACT: Background: Emerging global transformations - including a new Sustainable Development Agenda - are revealing increasingly interrelated goals and challenges, poised to be addressed by similarly integrated, multi-faceted solutions. Research to date has focused on determining the effectiveness of these approaches, yet a key question remains: are synergistic effects produced by integrating two or more sectors? We systematically reviewed impact evaluations on integrated development interventions to assess whether synergistic, amplified impacts are being measured and evaluated. Methods: The International Initiative for Impact Evaluation's (3ie) Impact Evaluation Repository comprised our sampling frame (n = 4,339). Following PRISMA guidelines, we employed a three-stage screening and review process. Results: We identified 601 journal articles that evaluated integrated interventions. Seventy percent used a randomized design to assess impact with regard to whether the intervention achieved its desired outcomes. Only 26 of these evaluations, however, used a full factorial design to statistically detect any synergistic effects produced by integrating sectors. Of those, seven showed synergistic effects. Conclusions: To date, evaluations of integrated development approaches have demonstrated positive impacts in numerous contexts, but gaps remain with regard to documenting whether integrated programming produces synergistic, amplified outcomes. Research on these program models needs to extend beyond impact only, and more explicitly examine and measure the synergies and efficiencies associated with linking two or more sectors. Doing so will be critical for identifying effective integrated development strategies that will help achieve the multi-sector SDG agenda.

SUBMITTER: Ahner-McHaffie TW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6034098 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluating the impact of integrated development: are we asking the right questions? A systematic review.

Ahner-McHaffie Tessa W TW Guest Greg G Petruney Tricia T Eterno Alexandra A Dooley Brian B

Gates open research 20170101

<b>Background:</b> Emerging global transformations - including a new Sustainable Development Agenda - are revealing increasingly interrelated goals and challenges, poised to be addressed by similarly integrated, multi-faceted solutions. Research to date has focused on determining the effectiveness of these approaches, yet a key question remains: are synergistic effects produced by integrating two or more sectors? We systematically reviewed impact evaluations on integrated development interventi ...[more]

PMID: 29984355

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionDespite knowledge about major health effects of secondhand tobacco smoke (SHS) exposure, systematic incorporation of SHS screening and counseling in clinical settings has not occurred.MethodsA three-round modified Delphi Panel of tobacco control experts was convened to build consensus on the screening questions that should be asked and identify opportunities and barriers to SHS exposure screening and counseling. The panel considered four questions: (1) what questions should be asked about SHS exposure; (2) what are the top priorities to advance the goal of ensuring that these questions are asked; (3) what are the barriers to achieving these goals; and (4) how might these barriers be overcome. Each panel member submitted answers to the questions. Responses were summarized and successive rounds were reviewed by panel members for consolidation and prioritization.ResultsPanelists agreed that both adults and children should be screened during clinical encounters by asking if they are exposed or have ever been exposed to smoke from any tobacco products in their usual environment. The panel found that consistent clinician training, quality measurement or other accountability, and policy and electronic health records interventions were needed to successfully implement consistent screening.ConclusionsThe panel successfully generated screening questions and identified priorities to improve SHS exposure screening. Policy interventions and stakeholder engagement are needed to overcome barriers to implementing effective SHS screening.ImplicationsIn a modified Delphi panel, tobacco control and clinical prevention experts agreed that all adults and children should be screened during clinical encounters by asking if they are exposed or have ever been exposed to smoke from tobacco products. Consistent training, accountability, and policy and electronic health records interventions are needed to implement consistent screening. Increasing SHS screening will have a significant impact on public health and costs.

Project description:The cultural keystone species theory predicts plant species that are culturally important, play a role in resource acquisition, fulfil a psycho-socio-cultural function within a given culture, have high use-value, have an associated naming and terminology in a native language, and a high level of species irreplaceability qualify for cultural keystone species designation. This theory was proposed as a framework for understanding relationships between human societies and species that are integral to their culture. A greater understanding of the dynamic roles of cultural keystones in both ecosystem processes and cultural societies is a foundation for facilitating biocultural conservation. Given such important direct conservation implications of the cultural keystone species theory, we reviewed the use of this theoretical framework across the literature to identify new directions for research. Most studies often emphasized the role of cultural keystones species in human societies but failed to provide a robust and reproducible measure of cultural keystone species status or direct test of the predictions of the theory and underemphasized their potential roles in ecosystem processes. To date, no studies that mentioned cultural keystone species tested the predictions of the theory. Only 4.4% provided a measure for cultural keystone status and 47.4% have cited or applied keystone designation to a given species without providing a reproducible measure for cultural keystone species. Studies that provided a measure for cultural keystone species primarily occurred in North America while few of these studies occurred in Australia and Europe with none occurring in Africa. As such, most cultural keystone species have been designated as such qualitatively based on researcher subjectivity while other studies have designated keystone species with quantitative indices of cultural importance, often incorporating researcher biases or measuring a few of the cultural keystone status predictors rather than all of them, indicating a lack of consensus in identifying cultural keystone species. Thus, we pose the need for a paradigm shift toward the development of serious and systematic approaches for keystone designation.

Project description:Rodent pests are especially problematic in terms of agriculture and public health since they can inflict considerable economic damage associated with their abundance, diversity, generalist feeding habits and high reproductive rates. To quantify rodent pest impacts and identify trends in rodent pest research impacting on small-holder agriculture in the Afro-Malagasy region we did a systematic review of research outputs from 1910 to 2015, by developing an a priori defined set of criteria to allow for replication of the review process. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We reviewed 162 publications, and while rodent pest research was spatially distributed across Africa (32 countries, including Madagascar), there was a disparity in number of studies per country with research biased towards four countries (Tanzania [25%], Nigeria [9%], Ethiopia [9%], Kenya [8%]) accounting for 51% of all rodent pest research in the Afro-Malagasy region. There was a disparity in the research themes addressed by Tanzanian publications compared to publications from the rest of the Afro-Malagasy region where research in Tanzania had a much more applied focus (50%) compared to a more basic research approach (92%) in the rest of the Afro-Malagasy region. We found that pest rodents have a significant negative effect on the Afro-Malagasy small-holder farming communities. Crop losses varied between cropping stages, storage and crops and the highest losses occurred during early cropping stages (46% median loss during seedling stage) and the mature stage (15% median loss). There was a scarcity of studies investigating the effectiveness of various management actions on rodent pest damage and population abundance. Our analysis highlights that there are inadequate empirical studies focused on developing sustainable control methods for rodent pests and rodent pests in the Africa-Malagasy context is generally ignored as a research topic.

Project description:In July 2010, the World Health Organization (WHO) issued formal revisions of its guidelines on the use of highly active antiretroviral therapy for HIV. The new guidelines greatly expand eligibility for treatment of adults and children, as well as for pregnant women seeking prophylaxis for vertical HIV transmission. WHO's new recommendations bring the guidelines closer to practices in developed countries, and its shift to earlier treatment alone will increase the number of treatment-eligible people by 50% or more.Scaling up access to HIV treatment is revealing important gaps in our understanding of how best to provide for all those in need. This knowledge gap is especially significant in developing countries, where women and children comprise a majority of those living with HIV infection. Given the magnitude and significance of these populations, the International AIDS Society, through its Industry Liaison Forum, prioritized HIV treatment and prophylaxis of women and children. In March 2010, the International AIDS Society and 15 partners launched a Consensus Statement outlining priority areas in which a relative lack of knowledge impedes delivery of optimal prevention of mother to child transmission (PMTCT) and treatment to women and children.The Consensus Statement, "Asking the Right Questions: Advancing an HIV Research Agenda for Women and Children", makes a special appeal for a more gender-sensitive approach to HIV research at all stages, from conception to design and implementation. It particularly emphasizes research to enhance the understanding of sex-based differences and paediatric needs in treatment uptake and response. In addition to clinical issues, the statement focuses on programmatic research that facilitates access and adherence to antiretroviral regimens. Better coordination of HIV management with sexual and reproductive healthcare delivery is one such approach.We discuss here our knowledge gaps concerning effective, safe PMTCT and treatment for women and children in light of the expansion envisioned by WHO's revised guidelines. The guideline's new goals present an opportunity for advancing the women and children's agenda outlined in the Consensus Statement.

Project description:BackgroundConversations about research priorities with members of the public are rarely designed specifically to include people who identify as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ+) and are not researchers.MethodsGenerally, to address this gap, and specifically, to inform future research for CLS, we carried out a rapid review of published research priority sets covering LGBTQ+ topics, and an online workshop to prioritise identified themes.ResultsRapid review: results. The rapid review identified 18 LGBTQ+ research priority sets. Some focussed on specific populations such as women or men, younger or older people or people living within families. Five addressed transgender and gender non- conforming populations. All of the research priority sets originated from English-speaking, high and middle-income countries (UK, US, Canada, and Australia), and date from 2016 onwards. Prioritization approaches were wide-ranging from personal commentary to expert workshops and surveys. Participants involved in setting priorities mostly included research academics, health practitioners and advocacy organisations, two studies involved LGBTQ+ public in their process. Research priorities identified in this review were then grouped into themes which were prioritised during the workshop. Workshop: results. For the workshop, participants were recruited using local (Cambridge, UK) LGBTQ+ networks and a national advert to a public involvement in research matching website to take part in an online discussion workshop. Those that took part were offered payment for their time in preparing for the workshop and taking part. Participants personal priorities and experiences contributed to a consensus development process and a final ranked list of seven research themes and participants' experiences of healthcare, mental health advocacy, care homes, caring responsibilities, schools and family units added additional context.ConclusionsFrom the workshop the three research themes prioritised were: healthcare services delivery, prevention, and particular challenges / intersectionality of multiple challenges for people identifying as LGBTQ+. Research themes interconnected in many ways and this was demonstrated by the comments from workshop participants. This paper offers insights into why these priorities were important from participants' perspectives and detail about how to run an inclusive and respectful public involvement research exercise. On a practical level these themes will directly inform future research direction for CLS.

Dataset Information

Evaluating the impact of integrated development: are we asking the right questions? A systematic review.

Publications

Evaluating the impact of integrated development: are we asking the right questions? A systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets