Comprehensive evaluation of interventions: eight vital parameters
Jaclene A Zauszniewski Kate Hanna Harvey professor in community health nursing, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, United States
Abir Bekhet Associate professor of nursing, Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States
Kayla Herbell Postdoctoral fellow, Sinclair School of Nursing, University of Missouri, United States
Background It is critically important to determine the effectiveness of an intervention before it can be translated into clinical practice. However, the future implementation and sustainability of the intervention may be diminished if other intervention parameters are not assessed. This requires obtaining feedback from intervention recipients so interventions will be perceived as appealing, relevant, meaningful and beneficial to them; otherwise recipients may be unlikely to perform them over time, resulting in unsuccessful health outcomes.
Aim To propose the addition of two intervention parameters to the existing six-parameter model and provide examples from recent research of how each parameter can be tested.
Discussion Definitions of the eight parameters are provided and methods for analysing each of them explained. While some studies show necessity, fidelity and cost have unique distinguishing characteristics, other studies indicate feasibility, acceptability and safety have common features, and efficacy and effectiveness are closely associated.
Conclusion Researchers frequently examine one or two parameters, but few simultaneously apply the six-parameter model. This model is also missing two vital parameters – efficacy and cost.
Implications for practice Comprehensive and systematic evaluation of all eight intervention parameters is recommended before researchers begin randomised controlled trials and translate them into practice.
Zauszniewski JA, Bekhet A, Herbell K (2018) Comprehensive evaluation of interventions: eight vital parameters. Nurse Researcher. doi: 10.7748/nr.2018.e1603
This article has been subject to external double-blind peer review and has been checked for plagiarism using automated software
Conflict of interest
Published online: 26 November 2018
Want to read more?
Subscribe for unlimited access
Try 1 month’s access for just £1 and get:
Your subscription package includes:
- Full access to the website and the online archive
- Quaterly digital edition
- RCNi Portfolio and interactive CPD quizzes
- RCNi Learning with 200+ evidence-based modules
- 10 articles a month from any other RCNi journal
Already subscribed? Log in
Alternatively, you can purchase access to this article for the next seven days. Buy now