Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Jan 28:10:43.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-43.

Evaluation of health promotion in schools: a realistic evaluation approach using mixed methods

Jeanine Pommier  1 , Marie-Renée Guével, Didier Jourdan
Affiliations

Evaluation of health promotion in schools: a realistic evaluation approach using mixed methods

Jeanine Pommier et al. BMC Public Health. .

Abstract

Background: Schools are key settings for health promotion (HP) but the development of suitable approaches for evaluating HP in schools is still a major topic of discussion. This article presents a research protocol of a program developed to evaluate HP. After reviewing HP evaluation issues, the various possible approaches are analyzed and the importance of a realistic evaluation framework and a mixed methods (MM) design are demonstrated.

Methods/design: The design is based on a systemic approach to evaluation, taking into account the mechanisms, context and outcomes, as defined in realistic evaluation, adjusted to our own French context using an MM approach. The characteristics of the design are illustrated through the evaluation of a nationwide HP program in French primary schools designed to enhance children's social, emotional and physical health by improving teachers' HP practices and promoting a healthy school environment. An embedded MM design is used in which a qualitative data set plays a supportive, secondary role in a study based primarily on a different quantitative data set. The way the qualitative and quantitative approaches are combined through the entire evaluation framework is detailed.

Discussion: This study is a contribution towards the development of suitable approaches for evaluating HP programs in schools. The systemic approach of the evaluation carried out in this research is appropriate since it takes account of the limitations of traditional evaluation approaches and considers suggestions made by the HP research community.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
French regions involved in the project.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Theory-of-change model of a health promotion program in school setting. a Implementation system - an intervention once enacted must be carried out through an implementation system that includes rules, organizational structures and personnel who have been given the responsibility to administrate the intervention (Chen & Rossi, 1983). * Strategies. HP: heath promoting.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Iterative process from research purposes to opportunities to use mixed methods. HP: health promotion, MM: mixed methods.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Mixed methods embedded design of the research: data collection, analysis and interpretation procedures and products. QUAN: quantitative, qual: qualitative. a: regression (logistic, linear...). b: principle component analysis, multiple correspondent analysis, classification.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Tool development, data collection and analysis: relationships and iterative process between qualitative and quantitative approaches.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Hamel M, Blanchet L, Martin C. 6, 12, 17 Nous serons bien mieux! Les déterminants de la santé et du bien-être des enfants d'âge scolaire. Québec: Publications du Québec; 2001.
    1. St Leger L, Kolbe L, Lee A, McCall DS, Young IM. In: Global perspectives on health promotion effectiveness. McQueen DV, Jones CM, editor. Saint-Denis: Springer; 2007. School health promotion: Achievments, Challenges and Priorities; pp. 107–124. full_text.
    1. Li J, Mattes E, Stanley F, McMurray A, Hertzman C. Social determinants of child health and well-being. Health Sociology Review. 2009;18:3–11.
    1. WHO. Health promotion evaluation: recommendations to policy-makers. Geneva. 1998.
    1. Rootman I, Goodstadt M, Potvin L, Springett J. In: Evaluation in health promotion. Rootman I, Goodstadt M, Hyndman B, McQueen DV, Potvin L, Springett J, et al, editor. Denmark: WHO Regional Publications; 2001. A framework for health promotion evaluation; pp. 7–38.

Publication types