Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Public Health Reports logoLink to Public Health Reports
. 1979 Jun;94(3):210–215.

The four basic types of evaluation: clinical reviews, clinical trials, program reviews, and program trials.

J H Abramson
PMCID: PMC1431838  PMID: 109896

Abstract

Four basic types of evaluation, each appropriate in a distinctive situation, are the clinical review and the clinical trial, which are concerned with the care of the individual patient, and the program review and program trial, which deal with programs or services directed at groups or populations. Evaluative reviews are primarily motivated by concern with the welfare of the specific population served, and they appraise specific activities in specific settings as a basis for decisions concerning these activities. Clinical and program trials aim to generate knowledge of more general applicability, especially concerning causal relationships between care and outcomes. The types of evaluation differ in the questions they pose and in the methods used to answer them. Failure to draw a distinction between program reviews and program trials is a frequent cause of wasteful or unhelpful evaluative studies.

Full text

PDF
210

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Barro A. R. Survey and evaluation of approaches to physician performance measurement. J Med Educ. 1973 Nov;48(11):1047–1093. doi: 10.1097/00001888-197311000-00017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Blum H. L. Evaluating health care. Med Care. 1974 Dec;12(12):999–1011. doi: 10.1097/00005650-197412000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. CAMPBELL D. T. Factors relevant to the validity of experiments in social settings. Psychol Bull. 1957 Jul;54(4):297–312. doi: 10.1037/h0040950. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cay E. L., Philip A. E., Small W. P., Neilson J., Henderson M. A. Patient's assessment of the result of surgery for peptic ulcer. Lancet. 1975 Jan 4;1(7897):29–31. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(75)92384-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Costanzo G. A., Vertinsky I. Measuring of the quality of health care: a decision oriented typology. Med Care. 1975 May;13(5):417–431. doi: 10.1097/00005650-197505000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Deniston O. L., Rosenstock I. M., Getting V. A. Evaluation of program effectiveness. Public Health Rep. 1968 Apr;83(4):323–335. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Doll R. Surveillance and monitoring. Int J Epidemiol. 1974 Dec;3(4):305–314. doi: 10.1093/ije/3.4.305. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Donabedian A. Evaluating the quality of medical care. Milbank Mem Fund Q. 1966 Jul;44(3 Suppl):166–206. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Donabedian A. Measuring and evaluating hospital and medical care. Bull N Y Acad Med. 1976 Jan;52(1):51–59. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Koran L. M. The reliability of clinical methods, data and judgments (first of two parts). N Engl J Med. 1975 Sep 25;293(13):642–646. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197509252931307. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Thorner R. M. Health program evaluation in relation to health programming.The expectation and the reality. HSMHA Health Rep. 1971 Jun;86(6):525–532. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Public Health Reports are provided here courtesy of SAGE Publications

RESOURCES