An instrument for assessing public health system performance

Validity in rural settings

David Driscoll, Lucia Rojas-Smith, Sergey Sotnikov, Kim Gadsden-Knowles, Natalie Brevard Perry, Dennis D. Lenaway, Paul Halverson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: This study evaluated the validity and utility of the Local Public Health System Assessment Instrument (Local Instrument) of the National Public Health Performance Standards Program in rural settings. Methods: The study compared the Local Instrument scores of 6 rural local public health systems to external assessments of those public health systems. The 6 public health systems represented 3 states in which 1 of the 2 local jurisdictions had scored well below and the other well above the state median in a pilot test of the Local Instrument. The study design featured a case study approach consisting of an iterative and integrated combination of semistructured individual and focus group interviews along with the collection of archival materials provided by the 6 public health systems. Findings: Despite differences in Local Instrument scores, the representative public health systems in each state provided roughly the same levels of public health services. Sites varied tremendously in the percentage of survey items rated highly or less relevant. Conclusions: The National Public Health Performance Standards Program Local Instrument can provide a useful structure and process for assessing public health system performance at the local level. Key informants provided several recommendations to improve the Local Instrument, including clarification of difficult terminology and acronyms, and development of multiple instruments structured around subsets of survey items.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)254-259
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Rural Health
Volume22
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2006
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Public Health
United States Public Health Service
Focus Groups
Terminology
Health Status
Interviews

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Driscoll, D., Rojas-Smith, L., Sotnikov, S., Gadsden-Knowles, K., Perry, N. B., Lenaway, D. D., & Halverson, P. (2006). An instrument for assessing public health system performance: Validity in rural settings. Journal of Rural Health, 22(3), 254-259. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0361.2006.00041.x

An instrument for assessing public health system performance : Validity in rural settings. / Driscoll, David; Rojas-Smith, Lucia; Sotnikov, Sergey; Gadsden-Knowles, Kim; Perry, Natalie Brevard; Lenaway, Dennis D.; Halverson, Paul.

In: Journal of Rural Health, Vol. 22, No. 3, 01.06.2006, p. 254-259.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Driscoll, D, Rojas-Smith, L, Sotnikov, S, Gadsden-Knowles, K, Perry, NB, Lenaway, DD & Halverson, P 2006, 'An instrument for assessing public health system performance: Validity in rural settings', Journal of Rural Health, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 254-259. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0361.2006.00041.x
Driscoll D, Rojas-Smith L, Sotnikov S, Gadsden-Knowles K, Perry NB, Lenaway DD et al. An instrument for assessing public health system performance: Validity in rural settings. Journal of Rural Health. 2006 Jun 1;22(3):254-259. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0361.2006.00041.x
Driscoll, David ; Rojas-Smith, Lucia ; Sotnikov, Sergey ; Gadsden-Knowles, Kim ; Perry, Natalie Brevard ; Lenaway, Dennis D. ; Halverson, Paul. / An instrument for assessing public health system performance : Validity in rural settings. In: Journal of Rural Health. 2006 ; Vol. 22, No. 3. pp. 254-259.
@article{9999dba59ddf4900860aeced752860f0,
title = "An instrument for assessing public health system performance: Validity in rural settings",
abstract = "Purpose: This study evaluated the validity and utility of the Local Public Health System Assessment Instrument (Local Instrument) of the National Public Health Performance Standards Program in rural settings. Methods: The study compared the Local Instrument scores of 6 rural local public health systems to external assessments of those public health systems. The 6 public health systems represented 3 states in which 1 of the 2 local jurisdictions had scored well below and the other well above the state median in a pilot test of the Local Instrument. The study design featured a case study approach consisting of an iterative and integrated combination of semistructured individual and focus group interviews along with the collection of archival materials provided by the 6 public health systems. Findings: Despite differences in Local Instrument scores, the representative public health systems in each state provided roughly the same levels of public health services. Sites varied tremendously in the percentage of survey items rated highly or less relevant. Conclusions: The National Public Health Performance Standards Program Local Instrument can provide a useful structure and process for assessing public health system performance at the local level. Key informants provided several recommendations to improve the Local Instrument, including clarification of difficult terminology and acronyms, and development of multiple instruments structured around subsets of survey items.",
author = "David Driscoll and Lucia Rojas-Smith and Sergey Sotnikov and Kim Gadsden-Knowles and Perry, {Natalie Brevard} and Lenaway, {Dennis D.} and Paul Halverson",
year = "2006",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1748-0361.2006.00041.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "254--259",
journal = "Journal of Rural Health",
issn = "0890-765X",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An instrument for assessing public health system performance

T2 - Validity in rural settings

AU - Driscoll, David

AU - Rojas-Smith, Lucia

AU - Sotnikov, Sergey

AU - Gadsden-Knowles, Kim

AU - Perry, Natalie Brevard

AU - Lenaway, Dennis D.

AU - Halverson, Paul

PY - 2006/6/1

Y1 - 2006/6/1

N2 - Purpose: This study evaluated the validity and utility of the Local Public Health System Assessment Instrument (Local Instrument) of the National Public Health Performance Standards Program in rural settings. Methods: The study compared the Local Instrument scores of 6 rural local public health systems to external assessments of those public health systems. The 6 public health systems represented 3 states in which 1 of the 2 local jurisdictions had scored well below and the other well above the state median in a pilot test of the Local Instrument. The study design featured a case study approach consisting of an iterative and integrated combination of semistructured individual and focus group interviews along with the collection of archival materials provided by the 6 public health systems. Findings: Despite differences in Local Instrument scores, the representative public health systems in each state provided roughly the same levels of public health services. Sites varied tremendously in the percentage of survey items rated highly or less relevant. Conclusions: The National Public Health Performance Standards Program Local Instrument can provide a useful structure and process for assessing public health system performance at the local level. Key informants provided several recommendations to improve the Local Instrument, including clarification of difficult terminology and acronyms, and development of multiple instruments structured around subsets of survey items.

AB - Purpose: This study evaluated the validity and utility of the Local Public Health System Assessment Instrument (Local Instrument) of the National Public Health Performance Standards Program in rural settings. Methods: The study compared the Local Instrument scores of 6 rural local public health systems to external assessments of those public health systems. The 6 public health systems represented 3 states in which 1 of the 2 local jurisdictions had scored well below and the other well above the state median in a pilot test of the Local Instrument. The study design featured a case study approach consisting of an iterative and integrated combination of semistructured individual and focus group interviews along with the collection of archival materials provided by the 6 public health systems. Findings: Despite differences in Local Instrument scores, the representative public health systems in each state provided roughly the same levels of public health services. Sites varied tremendously in the percentage of survey items rated highly or less relevant. Conclusions: The National Public Health Performance Standards Program Local Instrument can provide a useful structure and process for assessing public health system performance at the local level. Key informants provided several recommendations to improve the Local Instrument, including clarification of difficult terminology and acronyms, and development of multiple instruments structured around subsets of survey items.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33745152293&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33745152293&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1748-0361.2006.00041.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1748-0361.2006.00041.x

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 254

EP - 259

JO - Journal of Rural Health

JF - Journal of Rural Health

SN - 0890-765X

IS - 3

ER -