Table 4

Schemata for appraising process evaluations and evidence on intervention implementation (quality and quantity)

Type of schema and evidence to be appraised	How the schema works and the criteria used
Assessments for health promotion evaluation studies       International Union of Health Promotion guide on the appraisal of published reports on evaluations of health promotion and health education interventions and programmes.¹⁰⁶	Reviewers' assessments of the adequacy with which Intervention objectives are phrased (for example, degree of specification) Situational framework is described (for example, how well the causal logic is described, the degree to which there are environmental barriers to the intervention, steps made to enlist the interest and cooperation of the program beneficiaries) Intervention “correspondence” (for example, the extent to which the intervention is tailored to local circumstances, rewards or reinforces progress towards goals, goodness of fit between variables measured and programme objectives)
Guides for appraising process evaluations of human services programs      Assess programme quality, programme implementation and programme congruence, for health education programs and within organisational environments.^67,85,107	Recommendations provided on assessing evaluation methods and measures undertaken of the following: programme implementation; recipient response; site or host organisational response; practitioner response; personnel competencies and broader political and environmental factors affecting programme performance.

Type of schema and evidence to be appraised

How the schema works and the criteria used

Assessments for health promotion evaluation studies       International Union of Health Promotion guide on the appraisal of published reports on evaluations of health promotion and health education interventions and programmes.¹⁰⁶

Reviewers' assessments of the adequacy with which

Intervention objectives are phrased (for example, degree of specification)
Situational framework is described (for example, how well the causal logic is described, the degree to which there are environmental barriers to the intervention, steps made to enlist the interest and cooperation of the program beneficiaries)
Intervention “correspondence” (for example, the extent to which the intervention is tailored to local circumstances, rewards or reinforces progress towards goals, goodness of fit between variables measured and programme objectives)

Guides for appraising process evaluations of human services programs      Assess programme quality, programme implementation and programme congruence, for health education programs and within organisational environments.^67,85,107

Recommendations provided on assessing evaluation methods and measures undertaken of the following: programme implementation; recipient response; site or host organisational response; practitioner response; personnel competencies and broader political and environmental factors affecting programme performance.