Skip all navigation and go to page content
NN/LM Home About OERC | Contact Us | Feedback |OERC Sitemap | Help | Bookmark and Share

Archive for April, 2014

4,000+ free diagram templates

“If people can see what you’re saying, they’ll understand it.”  This quote comes from the Perspectives page of Duarte.com, which now offers a free Diagrammer that provides more than 4,000 free, downloadable diagram templates to help you present your evaluation findings visually.

A handy directory helps you determine the type of diagram you need based on the data relationships you want to portray. You then choose a diagram and download it into a PowerPoint-ready image that is completely customizable. You add text, change font size and color, even move or eliminate parts of the diagram. The PowerPoint slide can be inserted into a slide file for an oral presentation or saved as an image and inserted into a written evaluation report.

I tried my hand at creating a diagram to show how NN/LM train-the-trainer programs encourage the spread of health information resource use. This is what I came up with:

Diagrammer image

I learned about this tool  from an AEA365 blog post by Sheila Robinson. As an example, she included an infographic she designed using the Diagrammer to illustrate American Evaluation Association learning opportunities.

Duarte.com is the company of Nancy Duarte, a master presentation designer who has become a favorite among evaluators on a mission to get their evaluation reports understood and used. If you are interested in punching up the impact of your presentations, you also might want to check out her book “Resonate” (2010, Wiley & Sons) or watch her popular TEDtalk The Secret Structure of Great Talks. Many of her principals can be applied to oral or written presentations.

 

 

 

New Journal: Systematic Reviews

Librarians’ expert searching skills provide some great opportunities for collaboration with researchers. Biomed Central’s new open access Systematic Reviews journal is about a specialized type of expert searching that librarians can provide for their communities. More than a source of protocols and a record of others’ work, this journal has great potential for those of us in academia who want to publish articles to share information with our colleagues about what we have done.

Here’s more information from the Aims and Scope:

Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal aims to publish high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modeling. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.

It is a long-term goal of the journal to ensure all systematic reviews are prospectively registered in an appropriate database, such as PROSPERO, as these resources for registration become available and are endorsed by the scientific community.

Article types include:

  • Research Articles
  • Commentaries
  • Letters
  • Methodologies
  • Protocols
  • Review Updates

The editors-in-chief comprise an international group hailing from the University of Ottawa; the RAND corporation and UCLA; and the University of York.

Take a look at this journal! It could be a source of inspiration for any librarian whose emphasis is on expert searching.

Community Health Strategies: Strengthening Reach and Impact

Last month the Group Health Research Institute (GHRI) presented a webcast entitled A Healthy Dose: Strengthening Reach and Impact of Community Strategies from their background of working with stakeholders who have deep (25-30 years) experience working with community health initiatives. They have noticed a trend over the past ten years to include more information beyond the basics of the number of community members reached and initial (short term) impacts of community health projects in related reports.

GHRI have also studied data available from the Kaiser Foundation and other resources to find that the critical factor for successful long term impacts of community health projects  is community involvement in them. Using the Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation (RE-AIM) model, which helps to best translate public health research into practice, they identified areas in projects ranging from low to high reach (fewer/greater numbers of community members involved) and low to high strength (lesser/greater impact on the health of the community).

Factors that calculate impact strength include whether a health project event is held one time or is a consistent part of the community’s environment, the degree that healthy options are the only choices available, and supporting community health projects with promotion and education. Some examples discussed during the webcast include building sidewalks (high reach, low strength) and establishing physical education classes at local schools (high reach, high strength).

The webcast recording and slides are available here, and their published findings in the American Journal of Evaluation are freely available at Using the Concept of “Population Dose” in Planning and Evaluating Community-Level Obesity Prevention Initiatives.

New SurveyMonkey mobile app

Attention iPad and iPhone users: SurveyMonkey recently launched a mobile app so you can create, send, and monitor your surveys from your phone or tablet. The app is free, although you need a SurveyMonkey account to use it.

With the SurveyMonkey app, you no longer have to rely on your computer to design and manage a survey. The app also allows you to conveniently view your data from any location with Internet access. I think the most notable benefit is that the analytic reports are optimized for mobile devices and are easy to read on small screens.

I have been asked how this app compares to QuickTapSurvey (see my previous blog entry). In my opinion, the app does not make SurveyMonkey comparable to QuickTapSurvey, which is designed specifically to collect onsite visitor feedback in informal settings such as exhibits and museums. SurveyMonkey, by comparison, is designed to collect data through email, web sites, or social media. Both apps work best in their respective settings. I think you could adapt SurveyMonkey to collect data at face-to-face events (if there is onsite Internet access), but it probably won’t work as smoothly as QuickTapSurvey.

For more information about the Survey Monkey mobile app, click here.