• Allen M. Khakshooy
  • Francesco Chiappelli


A renowned evaluator, Daniel L. Stufflebeam, once noted that “the purpose of evaluation is to improve, not prove” (Stufflebeam 1993). We begin the second half of the book with evaluation, a methodical determination of a health program or policy’s worth and significance using criteria governed by a set of standards to ensure its validity and reliability. As mentioned before in Chaps.  2 and  3, the validity and reliability of a program or policy is of utmost importance in both translational research and effectiveness in healthcare. This chapter introduces important philosophical models in evaluation, namely, William Farish, Joseph Rice, and Fredrick Taylor, all of which have made their contribution to the evolution of modern evaluation.


Evaluation Psychometric theory and measurement Scientific management of data Scientific method Criterion-referenced testing Scientific-experimental model Management-oriented model Qualitative-anthropological model Participant-oriented model Quantification Qualitative evaluation Formative evaluation Summative evaluation Participatory action research and evaluation (PARE) 

Recommended Reading

  1. Bloom BS, Hasting T, Madaus G. Handbook of formative and summative evaluation of student learning. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1971.Google Scholar
  2. Bogdan R, Taylor S. Looking at the bright side: A positive approach to qualitative policy and evaluation research. Qual Sociol. 1997;13:193–2.Google Scholar
  3. Chiappelli F. Fundamentals of evidence-based health care and translational science. Heidelberg: Springer; 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cochrane A. Effectiveness and efficiency. Random reflections on health service. London: Nuffield Provincial Hospital Trust; 1972.Google Scholar
  5. Donner A. A bayesian approach to the interpretation of sub-group results in clinical trials. J Chronic Dis. 1992;34:429–35.Google Scholar
  6. Donner A, Birkett N, Buck C. Randomisation by cluster: sample size requirements and analysis. Am J Epidemiol. 1991;114:906–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dowie J. “Evidence-based,” “cost-effective” and “preference-driven” medicine: decision analysis based medical decision making is the pre-requisite. J Health Serv Res Policy. 1996;1:104–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Gaventa J, Tandon R. Globalizing citizens: new dynamics of inclusion and exclusion. London: Zed; 2010.Google Scholar
  9. Gray JAM, Haynes RB, Sackett DL, Cook DJ, Guyatt GH. Transferring evidence from health care research into medical practice. 3. Developing evidence-based clinical policy. Evid Based Med. 1997;2:36–9.Google Scholar
  10. Gubrium JF, Holstein JA. The new language of qualitative method. New York: Oxford University Press; 2000.Google Scholar
  11. Ham C, Hunter DJ, Robinson R. Evidence-based policymaking—research must inform health policy as well as medical care. BMJ. 1995;310:71–2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Liddle J, Williamson M, Irwig L. Method for evaluating research and guidelines evidence. Sydney: NSW Health Department; 1999.Google Scholar
  13. Madaus GF, Stufflebeam DL, Kellaghan T. Evaluation models: viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation. 2nd ed. Hingham: Kluwer Academic; 2000.Google Scholar
  14. McIntyre A. Participatory action research. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2009.Google Scholar
  15. Muir Gray JA. Evidence-based health care: how to make health policy and management decisions. London: Churchill Livingstone; 1997.Google Scholar
  16. Patton MQ. Utilization-focused evaluation. 3 London Sage, 1996.Google Scholar
  17. Racino J. Policy, program evaluation and research in disability: community support for all. London: Haworth Press; 1999.Google Scholar
  18. Royse D, Thyer BA, Padgett DK, Logan TK. Program evaluation: an introduction. 4th ed. Belmont: Brooks-Cole; 2006.Google Scholar
  19. Scriven M. The methodology of evaluation. In: Stake RE, editor. Curriculum evaluation. Chicago: Rand McNally; 1967.Google Scholar
  20. Stufflebeam DL. The CIPP model for program evaluation. In: Madaus GF, Scriven M, Stufflebeam DL, editors. Evaluation models: viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation. Boston: Kluwer Nijhof; 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Allen M. Khakshooy
    • 1
  • Francesco Chiappelli
    • 2
  1. 1.Rappaport Faculty of MedicineTechnion-Israel Institute of TechnologyHaifaIsrael
  2. 2.UCLA School of DentistryLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations