Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Flora, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Finnegan, J. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Flora, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Finnegan, J. R., Jr
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Health Education Research, Vol. 8, No. 1, 81-95, 1993
© 1993 Oxford University Press

research-article

A community education monitoring system: methods from the Stanford Five-City Project, the Minnesota Heart Health Program and the Pawtucket Heart Health Program

June A. Flora, R. Craig Lefebvre1, David M. Murray2, Elaine J. Stone3, Annlouise Assaf4, Maurice B. Mittelmark5 and John R. Finnegan, Jr2

Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305
1Prospect Associates Rockville, MD 20852
2University of Minnesota Minneapolis, MN 55455–1015
3National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute Bethesda, MD 20892
4Brown University RI 02912
5Wake Forest University Winston-Salem, NC 27103, USA

Understanding the process of behavior change interventions is critical to achieving campaign effectiveness and successful program replication. The present article presents a community education monitoring system (CEMS) using data from the Stanford Five-City Project (FCP), the Minnesota Heart Health Program (MHHP) and the Pawtucket Heart Health Program (PHHP). CEMS records the number and type of intervention activities, outcome objectives, targets of change (individual, organizational or environmental), channel(s) of dissemination and proportion of programs funded by the community. These data illustrate (1) the application of theory for each project, (2) data-based program administration, (3) feedback for revising programs and (4) type of reach or ‘dose’ information obtained from intervention monitoring. Process evaluations such as CEMS provide critical links between field realities and evaluation outcomes. This type of evaluation develops standards for measuring program reach and allows comparisons with other programs. CEMS also illustrates how programs enact theory. Validation studies are critical to the continued successful use of CEMS. The first step, however, is to develop a uniform way of describing complex multichannel behavior change programs. CEMS in a refined form should prove invaluable to health promotion program planners whether in research or service settings.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Health Educ ResHome page
C. Escoffery, K. Glanz, and T. Elliott
Process evaluation of the Pool Cool Diffusion Trial for skin cancer prevention across 2 years
Health Educ. Res., August 1, 2008; 23(4): 732 - 743.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Health Educ ResHome page
T. Riley and P. Hawe
Researching practice: the methodological case for narrative inquiry
Health Educ. Res., April 1, 2005; 20(2): 226 - 236.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Epidemiol. Community HealthHome page
P. Hawe, A. Shiell, T. Riley, and L. Gold
Methods for exploring implementation variation and local context within a cluster randomised community intervention trial
J Epidemiol Community Health, September 1, 2004; 58(9): 788 - 793.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BMJHome page
P. Hawe, A. Shiell, and T. Riley
Complex interventions: how "out of control" can a randomised controlled trial be?
BMJ, June 26, 2004; 328(7455): 1561 - 1563.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Health Educ ResHome page
S. N. Gabhainn, C. C. Kelleher, A. M. Naughton, F. Carter, M. Flanagan, and M. J. McGrath
Socio-demographic variations in perspectives on cardiovascular disease and associated risk factors
Health Educ. Res., October 1, 1999; 14(5): 619 - 628.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eval RevHome page
S. A. McGraw, D. E. Sellers, C. C. Johnson, E. J. Stone, K. J. Bachman, J. Bebchuk, R. V. Luepker, and E. W. Edmundson
Using Process Data To Explain Outcomes: An Illustration From the Child and Adolescent Trial for Cardiovascular Health (CATCH)
Eval Rev, June 1, 1996; 20(3): 291 - 312.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.