|
||||||||
|
Volume 3: No. 1, January 2006
ORIGINAL RESEARCH
|
Score | ||||||
Site | Reach | Effectiveness | Adoption | Implementation | Maintenance | Overall |
Local High Performer 1 | 100 | 100 | 25 | 100 | 57 | 76.4 |
Local High Performer 2 | 86 | 86 | 46 | 71 | 71 | 72.0 |
Local Low Performer | 15 | 29 | 75 | 29 | 29 | 35.4 |
Figure 2. Overall RE-AIM score (an average of five RE-AIM scores) and individual RE-AIM scores for each of three local sites within one WISEWOMAN project. RE-AIM indicates Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (8).
This algorithm begins with a box for "Practice 1." An arrow links this box to a second box, "Number of times practice was state across all sites." An arrow leads from the second box to a third, "Ranking of sites who stated practice." Three arrows point from this box to three more boxes. One is "High-performing and low-performing sites = May Be Best Practice." The second is "All high-performing sites = Best Practice." The third is "All low-performing sites = Not Best Practice. The box with "High-performing and low-performing sites = May Be Best Practice" has an arrow that points to a box "Was there a difference in how sites implemented the practice that explains why the practice worked in high-performing but not low-performing sites?" From this box, one arrow points to "Yes = Best Practice" and another points to "No = May Be Best Practice." From "No = May Be Best Practice" an arrow points to a box "Are more than two thirds of the sites that use the practice high-performing?" From this box, one arrow points to "Yes = Best Practice" and another points to "No = Not Best Practice."
Figure 5. Algorithm for determining best practices in selected WISEWOMAN programs.
|
|
|
|
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
Privacy Policy | Accessibility This page last reviewed October 25, 2011
|
|