Evaluating performance of environmental health assessments

From Testiwiki
Revision as of 07:47, 19 August 2008 by Mikko Pohjola (talk | contribs) (new plan for abstract)
Jump to: navigation, search

<accesscontrol>Members of projects,,Workshop2008,,beneris,,Erac,,Heimtsa,,Hiwate,,Intarese</accesscontrol>

This is a manuscript about evaluating performance of environmental health assessments. It discusses different perspectives to evaluating the goodness of assessments and proposes a new more comprehensive approach to considering performace of environmental health assessments.

Abstract

Situation

  • environmental health assessment is intentional societal activity involving plural actors with diverse perspectives and needs
    • provide information on practical decision-making (political, industry, individuals)
    • increase awareness and level of understanding on important issues (experts, DMs, SHs, public)
    • advance scientific research (experts)
  • effectiveness of assessments must be ensured → performance of assessments needs to be considered and evaluated
  • various overlapping perspectives to the issue: uncertainty assessment, quality assurance, model development guidelines, ...

Problem

  • all perspectives provide only limited or narrow views to performance
    • use purpose of information often not considered
    • all aspects of performance not covered
    • evaluation as a separate process, often only after assessment
    • societal aspect often neglected
    • focus either on giving assessment procedure guidelines or considering product as such

Solution

  • multi-perspective approach to performance
    • quality of content
    • applicability
    • efficiency
  • an integral part of assessment process → applicable also in design and execution (a priori), not only evaluation (a posteriori)

Evaluation

  • focus on the mediator (conceptual artifacts) of the overall process
    • product|use purpose, assessment process|product
    • trialogical process, knowledge creation metaphor
    • not only collection and use of existing information or learning to deal with new situation, but also creation of new knowledge
  • capable of incorporating the goods from other perspectives into a more comprehensive and coherent approach
  • evaluation of performance can only be done meaningfully against purpose
    • various intentions need to be identified, explicated and prioritized in all assessments



WARNING: CONTENT BELOW THIS TEXT OUT OF DATE - TO BE REVISED SOONISH

Background

  • General assessment framework
  • Societal context of assessments
  • General purpose of assessments
    • to describe reality
    • fulfill specific needs
  • Open Assessment
  • How can performance of environmental health assessments be evaluated?

Methods

Results

  • Properties of good assessments
    • quality of content
    • applicability
    • efficiency
  • Relation of properties to information structure/content
  • Evaluation process
    • a priori and/or a posteriori view
    • identification of purpose
    • evaluation of quality of content (uncertainty + relevance)
      • in principle reality, but in practice golden standard as reference point D↷
    • evaluation of applicability
    • evaluation of efficiency (effort expenditure)
    • overall performance
      • potential for effectiveness/effort given purpose
        • can be further evaluated retrospectively against realized effectiveness (possibly against redefined purpose)

Discussion

  • Uncertainty as an aspect of performance
    • parameter uncertainty
    • model uncertainty
    • scenario uncertainty
  • Data source reliability as an aspect of performance
  • Performance exists only against a purpose
    • data about hypothesis

Conclusions

  • There is more to assessment performance than just statistical uncertainty and data source reliability
  • Overall performance of assessment can be evaluated systematically and explicitly
    • requires consistent information structure
    • a priori evaluation should be made an inherent part of assessment process

Competing interests

Authors' contributions

Acknowledgements

References

Figures

Tables

Additional files