Capacity assessment in public health community interventions: a systematic review

Louise A van Herwerden, Claire Palermo, Dianne P Reidlinger

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

The importance of building capacity in community interventions is well recognized. There is general agreement about the determinants of capacity and a range of existing capacity frameworks, however there is limited evidence or consistency in practice around assessing capacity in community interventions. The aim of this review was to describe how capacity is assessed in community interventions. A systematic review of the literature across four databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Sociological Abstracts) was performed. Studies in English from 2000 to 2017, that explicitly described how capacity building processes were assessed in community interventions in healthy populations, were included. All types of empirical study designs were eligible. From 2596 records, after exclusion criteria were applied, 19 studies were included describing 12 different capacity assessment frameworks or tools. Seventeen studies assessed capacity processes by measuring individual capacity domains in community interventions. The most common capacity domains used to assess capacity were leadership, resources, partnerships and intelligence. The majority (n = 15) of studies used qualitative or mixed methods designs to measure capacity. Nine studies assessed capacity prospectively over time; three before/after and six multiple times during the intervention. Five studies assessed capacity retrospectively. The findings suggest that capacity assessment may need to remain context specific and flexible in order to capture the ever-changing nature of capacity building over time. Future research should explore the utility of theoretical adaptive capacity assessment guidelines that direct researchers and practitioners when describing capacity assessment in community interventions.

Original languageEnglish
JournalHealth Promotion International
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 12 Sep 2018

Fingerprint

Public Health
Capacity Building
Needs Assessment
Intelligence
MEDLINE
Research Personnel
Databases
Guidelines
Population

Cite this

@article{1562729961c34a61bdf7e15cca9ff9cd,
title = "Capacity assessment in public health community interventions: a systematic review",
abstract = "The importance of building capacity in community interventions is well recognized. There is general agreement about the determinants of capacity and a range of existing capacity frameworks, however there is limited evidence or consistency in practice around assessing capacity in community interventions. The aim of this review was to describe how capacity is assessed in community interventions. A systematic review of the literature across four databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Sociological Abstracts) was performed. Studies in English from 2000 to 2017, that explicitly described how capacity building processes were assessed in community interventions in healthy populations, were included. All types of empirical study designs were eligible. From 2596 records, after exclusion criteria were applied, 19 studies were included describing 12 different capacity assessment frameworks or tools. Seventeen studies assessed capacity processes by measuring individual capacity domains in community interventions. The most common capacity domains used to assess capacity were leadership, resources, partnerships and intelligence. The majority (n = 15) of studies used qualitative or mixed methods designs to measure capacity. Nine studies assessed capacity prospectively over time; three before/after and six multiple times during the intervention. Five studies assessed capacity retrospectively. The findings suggest that capacity assessment may need to remain context specific and flexible in order to capture the ever-changing nature of capacity building over time. Future research should explore the utility of theoretical adaptive capacity assessment guidelines that direct researchers and practitioners when describing capacity assessment in community interventions.",
author = "{van Herwerden}, {Louise A} and Claire Palermo and Reidlinger, {Dianne P}",
year = "2018",
month = "9",
day = "12",
doi = "10.1093/heapro/day071",
language = "English",
journal = "Health Promotion",
issn = "0957-4824",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",

}

Capacity assessment in public health community interventions : a systematic review. / van Herwerden, Louise A; Palermo, Claire; Reidlinger, Dianne P.

In: Health Promotion International, 12.09.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Capacity assessment in public health community interventions

T2 - a systematic review

AU - van Herwerden, Louise A

AU - Palermo, Claire

AU - Reidlinger, Dianne P

PY - 2018/9/12

Y1 - 2018/9/12

N2 - The importance of building capacity in community interventions is well recognized. There is general agreement about the determinants of capacity and a range of existing capacity frameworks, however there is limited evidence or consistency in practice around assessing capacity in community interventions. The aim of this review was to describe how capacity is assessed in community interventions. A systematic review of the literature across four databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Sociological Abstracts) was performed. Studies in English from 2000 to 2017, that explicitly described how capacity building processes were assessed in community interventions in healthy populations, were included. All types of empirical study designs were eligible. From 2596 records, after exclusion criteria were applied, 19 studies were included describing 12 different capacity assessment frameworks or tools. Seventeen studies assessed capacity processes by measuring individual capacity domains in community interventions. The most common capacity domains used to assess capacity were leadership, resources, partnerships and intelligence. The majority (n = 15) of studies used qualitative or mixed methods designs to measure capacity. Nine studies assessed capacity prospectively over time; three before/after and six multiple times during the intervention. Five studies assessed capacity retrospectively. The findings suggest that capacity assessment may need to remain context specific and flexible in order to capture the ever-changing nature of capacity building over time. Future research should explore the utility of theoretical adaptive capacity assessment guidelines that direct researchers and practitioners when describing capacity assessment in community interventions.

AB - The importance of building capacity in community interventions is well recognized. There is general agreement about the determinants of capacity and a range of existing capacity frameworks, however there is limited evidence or consistency in practice around assessing capacity in community interventions. The aim of this review was to describe how capacity is assessed in community interventions. A systematic review of the literature across four databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Sociological Abstracts) was performed. Studies in English from 2000 to 2017, that explicitly described how capacity building processes were assessed in community interventions in healthy populations, were included. All types of empirical study designs were eligible. From 2596 records, after exclusion criteria were applied, 19 studies were included describing 12 different capacity assessment frameworks or tools. Seventeen studies assessed capacity processes by measuring individual capacity domains in community interventions. The most common capacity domains used to assess capacity were leadership, resources, partnerships and intelligence. The majority (n = 15) of studies used qualitative or mixed methods designs to measure capacity. Nine studies assessed capacity prospectively over time; three before/after and six multiple times during the intervention. Five studies assessed capacity retrospectively. The findings suggest that capacity assessment may need to remain context specific and flexible in order to capture the ever-changing nature of capacity building over time. Future research should explore the utility of theoretical adaptive capacity assessment guidelines that direct researchers and practitioners when describing capacity assessment in community interventions.

U2 - 10.1093/heapro/day071

DO - 10.1093/heapro/day071

M3 - Article

JO - Health Promotion

JF - Health Promotion

SN - 0957-4824

ER -