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
. 2022 Aug 23;17(8):e0267158.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267158. eCollection 2022.

How are public engagement health festivals evaluated? A systematic review with narrative synthesis

Affiliations

How are public engagement health festivals evaluated? A systematic review with narrative synthesis

Susannah Martin et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

The evaluation of public engagement health festivals is of growing importance, but there has been no synthesis of its practice to date. We conducted a systematic review of evidence from the evaluation of health-related public engagement festivals published since 2000 to inform future evaluation. Primary study quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Extracted data were integrated using narrative synthesis, with evaluation methods compared with the Queen Mary University of London public engagement evaluation toolkit. 407 database records were screened; eight studies of varied methodological quality met the inclusion criteria. Evaluations frequently used questionnaires to collect mixed-methods data. Higher quality studies had specific evaluation aims, used a wider variety of evaluation methods and had independent evaluation teams. Evaluation sample profiles were often gender-biased and not ethnically representative. Patient involvement in event delivery supported learning and engagement. These findings and recommendations can help improve future evaluations. (Research Registry ID reviewregistry1021).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. PRISMA flow diagram.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Conceptual map of evaluated outcomes and outputs.

References

    1. National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine. Communicating science effectively: A research agenda. Communicating Science Effectively: A Research Agenda. National Academies Press; 2017. p.1–137. - PubMed
    1. National Co-ordinating Centre for Public Engagement. Why does public engagement matter? [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2020 Aug 30]. Available from: https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/about-engagement/why-does-public-enga...
    1. Illingworth S, Redfern J, Millington S, Gray S. What’s in a Name? Exploring the Nomenclature of Science Communication in the UK. F1000Research. 2015. Jul 28;4:409. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.6858.2 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Duncan S, Manners P. Engaging publics with research Reviewing the REF impact case studies and templates [Internet]. Bristol; 2017. Available from: www.publicengagement.ac.uk
    1. National Co-ordinating Centre for Public Engagement. What is public engagement? [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2021 Dec 27]. Available from: https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/about-engagement/what-public-engagement

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources