Towards Designing a Performance Measurement System for the CGIAR : Draft Report

The System Office established the Working Group on Performance Measurement in May 2003, under the Co-Chairmanship of two ExCo members: Kevin Cleaver (ExCo/FC Chair) and Luis Arango (ExCo/PC member). Three sets of activities were carried out in preparation for the first meeting of the WG on September 5, 2003:(1) The CGIAR Secretariat prepared a Sourcebook on Performance Measurement in Research Institutions and Programs as background on approaches and methods of performance measurement being used in similar organizations globally.(2) Members of the WG shared additional information relevant to the objectives of the exercise (e.g., papers, articles);(3) A sub-group of the WG (made up of technical experts and resource persons1) met for a two day workshop on August 11-12, 2003 to discuss and outline performance measurement options that could be considered by the WG at its September 5 meeting, as a means of facilitating the task of the WG. This paper reflects the outcome of this preparatory workshop.The paper is organized as follows: the remainder of this chapter discusses the rationalebehind the worldwide trends towards Performance Measurement and offers definitions ofsome key terms. Chapter 2 focuses on the CGIAR, describing potential purposes and usesof performance measurement, identifying possible key elements of a performance measurement system, and outlining how such a system could fit into the planning and evaluation processes of the CGIAR. The final chapter summarizes the main conclusions and recommendations. This report was discussed during the Business Meeting at AGM 2003

Improving coverage measurement for reproductive, maternal, neonatal and child health: gaps and opportunities.

BACKGROUND: Regular monitoring of coverage for reproductive, maternal, neonatal, and child health (RMNCH) is central to assessing progress toward health goals. The objectives of this review were to describe the current state of coverage measurement for RMNCH, assess the extent to which current approaches to coverage measurement cover the spectrum of RMNCH interventions, and prioritize interventions for a novel approach to coverage measurement linking household surveys with provider assessments. METHODS: We included 58 interventions along the RMNCH continuum of care for which there is evidence of effectiveness against cause-specific mortality and stillbirth. We reviewed household surveys and provider assessments used in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to determine whether these tools generate measures of intervention coverage, readiness, or quality. For facility-based interventions, we assessed the feasibility of linking provider assessments to household surveys to provide estimates of intervention coverage. RESULTS: Fewer than half (24 of 58) of included RMNCH interventions are measured in standard household surveys. The periconceptional, antenatal, and intrapartum periods were poorly represented. All but one of the interventions not measured in household surveys are facility-based, and 13 of these would be highly feasible to measure by linking provider assessments to household surveys. CONCLUSIONS: We found important gaps in coverage measurement for proven RMNCH interventions, particularly around the time of birth. Based on our findings, we propose three sets of actions to improve coverage measurement for RMNCH, focused on validation of coverage measures and development of new measurement approaches feasible for use at scale in LMICs

Sexual attraction, sexual identity, and psychosocial well-being in a national sample of young women during emerging adulthood.

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/106627/1/Sexual attraction, sexual identity, and psychosocial well-being in a national sample of young women during emerging adulthood.pd

Validation studies for population-based intervention coverage indicators: design, analysis, and interpretation.

BACKGROUND: Population-based intervention coverage indicators are widely used to track country and program progress in improving health and to evaluate health programs. Indicator validation studies that compare survey responses to a "gold standard" measure are useful to understand whether the indicator provides accurate information. The Improving Coverage Measurement (ICM) Core Group has developed and implemented a standard approach to validating coverage indicators measured in household surveys, described in this paper. METHODS: The general design of these studies includes measurement of true health status and intervention receipt (gold standard), followed by interviews with the individuals observed, and a comparison of the observations (gold standard) to the responses to survey questions. The gold standard should use a data source external to the respondent to document need for and receipt of an intervention. Most frequently, this is accomplished through direct observation of clinical care, and/or use of a study-trained clinician to obtain a gold standard diagnosis. Follow-up interviews with respondents should employ standard survey questions, where they exist, as well as alternative or additional questions that can be compared against the standard household survey questions. RESULTS: Indicator validation studies should report on participation at every stage, and provide data on reasons for non-participation. Metrics of individual validity (sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) and population-level validity (inflation factor) should be reported, as well as the percent of survey responses that are "don't know" or missing. Associations between interviewer and participant characteristics and measures of validity should be assessed and reported. CONCLUSIONS: These methods allow respondent-reported coverage measures to be validated against more objective measures of need for and receipt of an intervention, and should be considered together with cognitive interviewing, discriminative validity, or reliability testing to inform decisions about which indicators to include in household surveys. Public health researchers should assess the evidence for validity of existing and proposed household survey coverage indicators and consider validation studies to fill evidence gaps

Epidemiologic analyses with error-prone exposures: review of current practice and recommendations.

PURPOSE: Variables in observational studies are commonly subject to measurement error, but the impact of such errors is frequently ignored. As part of the STRengthening Analytical Thinking for Observational Studies Initiative, a task group on measurement error and misclassification seeks to describe the current practice for acknowledging and addressing measurement error. METHODS: Task group on measurement error and misclassification conducted a literature survey of four types of research studies that are typically impacted by exposure measurement error: (1) dietary intake cohort studies, (2) dietary intake population surveys, (3) physical activity cohort studies, and (4) air pollution cohort studies. RESULTS: The survey revealed that while researchers were generally aware that measurement error affected their studies, very few adjusted their analysis for the error. Most articles provided incomplete discussion of the potential effects of measurement error on their results. Regression calibration was the most widely used method of adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Methods to correct for measurement error are available but require additional data regarding the error structure. There is a great need to incorporate such data collection within study designs and improve the analytical approach. Increased efforts by investigators, editors, and reviewers are needed to improve presentation of research when data are subject to error

Neonatal mortality risk for vulnerable newborn types in 15 countries using 125.5 million nationwide birth outcome records, 2000-2020.

OBJECTIVE: To compare neonatal mortality associated with six novel vulnerable newborn types in 125.5 million live births across 15 countries, 2000-2020. DESIGN: Population-based, multi-country study. SETTING: National data systems in 15 middle- and high-income countries. METHODS: We used individual-level data sets identified for the Vulnerable Newborn Measurement Collaboration. We examined the contribution to neonatal mortality of six newborn types combining gestational age (preterm [PT] versus term [T]) and size-for-gestational age (small [SGA], 90th centile) according to INTERGROWTH-21st newborn standards. Newborn babies with PT or SGA were defined as small and T + LGA was considered as large. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) and population attributable risks (PAR%) for the six newborn types. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mortality of six newborn types. RESULTS: Of 125.5 million live births analysed, risk ratios were highest among PT + SGA (median 67.2, interquartile range [IQR] 45.6-73.9), PT + AGA (median 34.3, IQR 23.9-37.5) and PT + LGA (median 28.3, IQR 18.4-32.3). At the population level, PT + AGA was the greatest contributor to newborn mortality (median PAR% 53.7, IQR 44.5-54.9). Mortality risk was highest among newborns born before 28 weeks (median RR 279.5, IQR 234.2-388.5) compared with babies born between 37 and 42 completed weeks or with a birthweight less than 1000 g (median RR 282.8, IQR 194.7-342.8) compared with those between 2500 g and 4000 g as a reference group. CONCLUSION: Preterm newborn types were the most vulnerable, and associated with the highest mortality, particularly with co-existence of preterm and SGA. As PT + AGA is more prevalent, it is responsible for the greatest burden of neonatal deaths at population level

Assessing reading comprehension with narrative and expository texts: dimensionality and relationship with fluency, vocabulary and memory

Reading comprehension assessment should rely on valid instruments that enable adequate conclusions to be taken regarding students’ reading comprehension performance. In this article, two studies were conducted to collect validity evidence for the vertically scaled forms of two Tests of Reading Comprehension for Portuguese elementary school students in the second to fourth grades, one with narrative texts (TRC-n) and another with expository ones (TRC-e). Two samples of 950 and 990 students participated in Study 1, the study of the dimensionality of the TRC-n and TRC-e forms, respectively. Confirmatory factor analyses provided evidence of an acceptable fit for the one-factor solution for all test forms. Study 2 included 218 students to collect criterion-related validity. The scores obtained in each of the test forms were significantly correlated with the ones obtained in other reading comprehension measures and with the results obtained in oral reading fluency, vocabulary and working memory tests. Evidence suggests that the test forms are valid measures of reading comprehension.CIEC – Research Centre on Child Studies, IE, UMinho (FCT R&D unit 317), Portugal. Grant FCOMP-01-0124-FEDER-010733 from Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT) and the European Regional Development Fund (FEDER) through the European program COMPETE (Operational Program for Competitiveness Factors) under the National Strategic Reference Framework (QREN). It was also supported by FCT grant SFRH/BD/94763/2013.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

An exploration of men's experiences of undergoing active surveillance for favourable-risk prostate cancer: A mixed methods study protocol

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is one of the most common male cancers worldwide. Active Surveillance (AS) has been developed to allow men with lower risk disease to postpone or avoid the adverse side effects associated with curative treatments until the disease progresses. Despite the medical benefits of AS, it is reported that living with untreated cancer can create a significant emotional burden for patients. METHODS/DESIGN: The aim of this study is to gain insight into the experiences of men eligible to undergo AS for favourable-risk PCa. This study has a mixed-methods sequential explanatory design consisting of two phases: quantitative followed by qualitative. Phase 1 has a multiple point, prospective, longitudinal exploratory design. Ninety men diagnosed with favourable-risk prostate cancer will be assessed immediately post-diagnosis (baseline) and followed over a period of 12 months, in intervals of 3 month. Ninety age-matched men with no cancer diagnosis will also be recruited using peer nomination and followed up in the same 3 month intervals. Following completion of Phase 1, 10-15 AS participants who have reported both the best and worst psychological functioning will be invited to participate in semi-structured qualitative interviews. Phase 2 will facilitate further exploration of the quantitative results and obtain a richer understanding of participants' personal interpretations of their illness and psychological wellbeing. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study to utilise early baseline measures; include a healthy comparison group; calculate sample size through power calculations; and use a mixed methods approach to gain a deeper more holistic insight into the experiences of men diagnosed with favourable-risk prostate cancer