PubMed · 1037488
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
P H Gill. OD problem diagnosis: a model.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1037488/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Empowerment evaluation is the use of evaluation concepts, techniques, and findings to foster improvement and self-determination. Program participants--including clients--conduct their own evaluations: an outside evaluator often serves as a coach or additional facilitator depending on internal program capabilities. Empowerment evaluation has three steps: 1) establishing a mission; 2) taking stock; and 3) planning for the future. These three steps build capacity. They also build a sense of community, often referred to as communities of practice. Empowerment evaluation also helps to create a culture of learning and evaluation within an organization or community.
CONTEXT: Participation in proficiency testing is required under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988. Although the primary purpose of this testing is evaluation of current laboratory performance, a major secondary benefit of such testing is postulated to be progressive improvement in laboratory performance over time as laboratories learn from their previous experiences and feedback. OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that a secondary result of proficiency testing is improvement over time of laboratory performance. DESIGN: The performance of participants in a large proficiency testing program (EXCEL), designed for clinic and office laboratories, on a specific problematic competence, the ability to differentiate group A streptococcus from group C streptococci, was monitored during a 6-year period (1996-2001) for changes in participant performance. INTERVENTIONS: With each testing cycle, feedback on performance relative to peers and an educational discussion analyzing performance and suggesting best practices was submitted to participants. RESULTS: Despite consistent feedback, there was no significant change in participant performance throughout the period studied. CONCLUSIONS: In a large, stable proficiency testing program, a significant throat culture competence, which demonstrated less than optimal performance, did not improve over time, suggesting that current utilization of proficiency testing results in laboratory improvement programs is suboptimal.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.