Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 143
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 143
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 209
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 994
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3134
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 574
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 488
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Aim: The questionnaire "Capacity building in Neighbourhoods (KEQ)" has five dimensions which are regarded as intermediary outcome results of community health promotion. The questionnaire was to be completed by local actors and thus has some features of self-evaluation. We wanted to find out whether external experts make similar or more critical assessments.
Methods: We conducted an audit of the health promotion activities in our intervention area (Hamburg neighbourhood Lenzsiedlung) in two steps. Five external health promotion experts functioned as auditors with experience in evaluating good practice projects of health promotion. The first part of the audit was a document-based evaluation, the second part a visit-based one during a two-day stay in the intervention area.
Results: In the comparison of local actors' assessments (KEQ questionnaire results) with those of external experts in the document-based audit, the judgements of external experts were more positive on all five dimensions of the questionnaire (deviations from +0.1 to +0.9 on a scale from 1 to 5). In the visit-based audit, there was convergence in the assessments of the local actors and the external experts. They were partly identical; only the dimension "local leadership" was viewed slightly more critically by the external experts.
Conclusions: Based on our discussion of the four methodical problems of the comparison, we conclude that, on the whole, local actors do not tend to evaluate their activities too positively. However, if resources are available, one should try to confirm local views of outcomes by external assessments.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11248458 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-1532-1911 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!