Skip to main content

Table 3 Evaluation details of eight trainings with long evaluation periods

From: Approaches and impact of non-academic research capacity strengthening training models in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review

 

Long term evaluation period

Indicators

Matovu et al 2013 [16]

Williams et al. 2010 [20]

Adams et al 2003 [10]

Laserson et al. 2005 [12]

Ali et al. 2012 [15]

Varkevisser et al. 2001 [13]

Buist and Parry 2013 [11]

Zachariah et al. 2011 [23]

Percentage of studies reporting on indicators

Study’s evaluation approach

  

 Evaluation framework used

Yes

NR

Yes

NR

Yes

NR

NR

NR

37.5

 Evaluation method (qualitative/quantitative)

Qual

Mixed

Qual

Quant

Quant

Quant

Quant

NA

 

 Details (Satisfaction survey/self-reported changes/pre- and post-skills test/research outputs survey)

Interviews

Program data

Focus Group

Questionnaire

Database and reports

Meetings and reports

Email Survey

NA

 

 Program evaluation period months

36

48

60

84

96

168

204

NR

 

Reviews measures of effectiveness of RCS, based on Cooke’s framework

  

 Improved confidence and skills

Evidence of knowledge and skills developed (e.g., improved post-test scores)

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

100.0

Evidence of confidence building (e.g., trainees becomes trainers; obtained research-related jobs)

Yes

Yes

NR

NR

Yes

Yes

Yes

NR

62.5

Research undertaken after training (e.g., involvement in subsequent research)

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

100.0

 Research is close to practice

Practitioner and program staff involvement (e.g., nurse, manager trainees)

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

87.5

Research relevant to or used in practice (e.g., reported changes in practice)

Yes

NR

Yes

Yes

NR

Yes

Yes

Yes

75.0

Patient-centred outcome measures used

Yes

No

NR

NR

NR

NR

No

NR

12.5

Action oriented methodologies used (e.g., research done on quality care)

Yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

Yes

NR

25.0

 Research enhance by partnerships

Between novice and experienced researchers

Yes

Yes

No

NR

No

NR

No

No

25.0

Inter-professional linkages (e.g., between researchers, policy makers, different disciplines)

Yes

Yes

No

NR

Yes

No

Yes

No

50.0

 Impactful dissemination

Publications in peer-reviewed journals

NR

NR

NR

NR

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

50.0

Conference/workshop presentation

Yes

NR

NR

NR

Yes

NR

Yes

NR

37.5

Evidenced of applied research findings (e.g., changes in policy/practice reported)

Yes

NR

NR

Yes

NR

Yes

Yes

Yes

62.5

 Continuity and sustainability

Successful access of funding (grants/fellowships)

NR

NR

NR

NR

Yes

NR

Yes

Yes

37.5

Enduring collaborations (e.g., relationship building between involved institutions to promote individual training)

Yes

Yes

NR

NR

Yes

Yes

Yes

NR

62.5

Continued mentorship and supervision

Yes

NR

No

Yes

Yes

NR

Yes

Yes

62.5

 Infrastructure for research

Institutional support for undertaking research

Yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

Yes

NR

NR

25.0

Protected research time

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

0.0

Budget line

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

0.0

Mentorship and supervision structures

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

0.0