journal of men's health
Volume 6, Issue 1 , Pages 36-49 , March 2009

The reality of partnership working when undertaking an evaluation of a national Well Men's Service

  • Garth D. Reid, BSc, MSc

      Affiliations

    • Department of Public Health, University of Aberdeen, UK
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author.
    • ,
  • Edwin R. van Teijlingen, MA, Med, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Public Health, University of Aberdeen, UK
    • ,
  • Flora Douglas, BN RGN, PgDip, MPH

      Affiliations

    • Department of Public Health, University of Aberdeen, UK
    • ,
  • Lynn Robertson, BSc

      Affiliations

    • Department of Public Health, University of Aberdeen, UK
    • ,
  • Anne Ludbrook, BA, MSc

      Affiliations

    • Health Economics Research Unit, Polwarth Building, University of Aberdeen, UK

Received 8 September 2008 ,Accepted 26 September 2008.

References 

  1. The Scottish Office: Department of Health. Designed to Care: Renewing the National Health Service in Scotland. Cm 3811. London: The Stationary Office; 1997. Available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library/documents1/care-00.htm.
  2. The Scottish Office. Towards a New Way of Working – The Plan for Managing People in the NHS in Scotland. London: The Stationary Office;1998. Available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library/documents3/tnww-00.htm.
  3. WHO European Working Group on Health Promotion Evaluation. Health Promotion Evaluation: Recommendations to Policy-makers. EUR/HFA target 15. Copenhagen: Regional office for Europe; 1998. Available at: http://www.dors.it/alleg/0400/1998%20Euro%20WHO%20HP%20Evaluation%20recommendations%20to%20policy-makers.pdf.
  4. NHS Scotland. Partnership: Delivering the Future. Taking Stock of Partnership Working Report by the Project Steering Group. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive; 2005. Available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/77843/0018751.pdf.
  5. Wildridge V, Childs S, Cawthra L, Madge B. How to create successful partnerships – a review of the literature. Health Info Libr J. 2004;21(Suppl 1):3–19
  6. Israel BA, Schulz AJ, Parker EA, Becker AB. Review of community-based research: assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annu Rev Public Health. 1998;19:173–202
  7. Hassan L, Spencer J, Hogard E. Managing Sure Start in partnership. Community Pract. 2006;79(8):247–251
  8. Rattray JE, Paul F, Tully V. Partnership working between a higher education institution and NHS TRUSTS: developing an acute and critical care module. Nurs Crit Care. 2006;11(3):111–117
  9. Keating L, Carter H, Darwent M, Bateman S, Mackay DM, Pullinger R. Partnership working in the production of clinical guidelines. Health Info Libr J. 2004;21(Suppl 1):46–51
  10. El Ansari W, Phillips CJ, Hammick M. Collaboration and partnerships: developing the evidence base. Health Soc Care Community. 2001;9(4):215–227
  11. Richardson A, Sitzia J, Cotterell P. ‘Working the system’. Achieving change through partnership working: an evaluation of cancer partnership groups. Health Expect. 2005;8(3):210–220
  12. Audit Commission. A Fruitful Partnership: Effective Partnership Working. London: Audit Commission; 1998;Available at: http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/Products/NATIONAL-REPORT/A190CA25-7A7E-47D1-BCAB-373A86B709C0/A%20Fruitful%20Partnership.pdf
  13. Parry O, Gnich W, Platt S. Principles in practice: reflections on a ‘postpositivist’ approach to evaluation research. Health Educ Res. 2001;16(2):215–226
  14. Asthana S, Richardson S, Halliday J. Partnership working in public policy provision: a framework for evaluation. Soc Pol Admin. 2002;36(7):780–795
  15. Wills J, Ellison GT. Integrating services for public health: challenges facing multidisciplinary partnership working. Public Health. 2007;121(7):546–548
  16. Office of the Chief Researcher in the Scottish Executive. Partnership Working: Key Issues Around Evaluation. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive; 2002. Available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/25954/0028683.pdf.
  17. Springett J. Appropriate approaches to the evaluation of health promotion. Crit Public Health. 2001;11(2):139–151
  18. In:  Stufflebeam DL,  Madaus GF,  Kellaghan T editor. Evaluation Models. Viewpoints on Educational and Human Services Evaluation. 2nd edition. Boston, Dordrecht, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2000;
  19. Patton MQ. Utilization-focused Evaluation: The New Century Text. 3rd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1997;
  20. Bidmead C, Cowley S. Evaluating family partnership training in health visitor practice. Community Pract. 2005;78(7):239–245
  21. Freeman T, Peck E. Evaluating partnerships: a case study of integrated specialist mental health services. Health Soc Care Community. 2006;14(5):408–417
  22. Scottish Executive . Evaluation of the Well Men Services Pilots Research Specification. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive; 2004;
  23. Shah P, Mountain D. The medical model is dead – long live the medical model. Br J Psychiatry. 2007;191:375–377
  24. In:  Burton R,  MacDonald G editor. Health Promotion: Disciplines, Diversity and Developments. 2nd edition. New York: Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group; 2002;
  25. van Teijlingen E. A critical analysis of the medical model as used in the study of pregnancy and childbirth. Sociol Res Online. 2005;10(2):1–21
  26. Craddock C, Reid M. Structure and struggle: implementing a social model of a well woman clinic in Glasgow. Soc Sci Med. 1993;36(1):67–76
  27. Leishman J, Dalziel A. Taking action to improve the health of Scottish men. Men's Health J. 2003;2(3):90–93
  28. General Regster Office for Scotland. Scottish Census, 2001; Available at: http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/files/indform.pdf [Accessed July 8, 2007].
  29. Scottish Health Survey. The Scottish Health Survey - 2003 Results. 2005; Available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2005/11/25145024/50251 [Accessed October 1, 2008].
  30. Douglas F, van Teijlingen E, Brindle S, Hundley V, Bruce J, Torrance N. Designing questionnaires for midwifery research. RCM Midwives. 2005;8(5):212–215
  31. Douglas F, Torrance N, van Teijlingen E, Meloni S, Kerr A. Primary care staff's views and experiences related to routinely advising patients about physical activity. A questionnaire survey. BMC Public Health. 2006;6:138
  32. Bowling A. Measuring Health: A Review of Quality of Life Measurement Scales. Milton Keynes: Open University Press; 1991;
  33. de Vaus DA. Surveys In Social Research. London: University College London; 1998;
  34. Cleopas A, Kolly V, Perneger TV. Longer response scales improved the acceptability and performance of the Nottingham Health Profile. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59(11):1183–1190
  35. Midgley G. Systemic intervention for public health. Am J Public Health. 2006;96(3):466–472
  36. Choi BC, Pak AW. A catalog of biases in questionnaires. Prev Chronic Dis. 2005;2(1):A13
  37. Converse JM, Presser S. Survey Questions: Handcrafting the Standardized Questionnaire. Beverly Hills: Sage; 1986;
  38. van Teijlingen E, Hundley V. The importance of pilot studies. Nurs Stand. 2002;16(40):33–36
  39. O'Sullivan RG. Practicing Evaluation: A Collaborative Approach. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications; 2004;
  40. Guba EG, Lincoln YS. Fourth Generation Evaluation. Newbury Park, London, New Delhi: Sage Publications; 1989;
  41. Dunet DO, Reyes M. Stakeholder-focused evaluation of an online course for health care providers. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006;26(4):257–267
  42. Harper GW, Bangi AK, Contreras R, Pedraza A, Tolliver M, Vess L. Diverse phases of collaboration: working together to improve community-based HIV interventions for adolescents. Am J Community Psychol. 2004;33(3–4):193–204
  43. Wadsworth Y. Everyday evaluation on the run. 2nd edition. New South Wales, Australia: Allen & Unwin; 1997;
  44. Office of National Statistics. GP Consultations, 2006. London: General Household Survey, Office for National Statistics; 2006. Available at: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=1109 [Accessed June 1, 2008].
  45. Banks I. No man's land: men, illness and the NHS. BMJ. 2001;323:1058–1060
  46. Doyal L. Sex, gender, and health: the need for a new approach. BMJ. 2001;323(7320):1061–1063
  47. Evans D, Killoran A. Tackling health inequalities through partnership working: learning from a realistic evaluation. Crit Public Health. 2000;10(2):125–140
  48. Dewar BJ. Beyond tokenistic involvement of older people in research – a framework for future development and understanding. J Clin Nurs. 2005;14(Suppl 1):48–53
  49. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic Evaluation. London: Sage Publications; 1997;
  50. Rossi P, Freeman H, Lipsey M. Evaluation: A Systematic Approach. 7th edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2003;

PII: S1875-6867(08)00202-9

doi: 10.1016/j.jomh.2008.09.007

journal of men's health
Volume 6, Issue 1 , Pages 36-49 , March 2009

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution