Search

Since the beginning of the 21st century, evaluability assessments have experienced a resurgence of interest. However, little is known about how evaluability assessments have been used to improve future evaluations. In this article, we identify characteristics, challenges, and opportunities of evaluability assessments based on a scoping review of case studies published since 2008 (n = 59). We find that evaluability assessments are increasingly used for program development and evaluation planning. Several challenges are identified: politics of evaluability; ambiguity between evaluability and evaluation, and limited considerations of gender equity and human rights. To ensure relevance, evaluability approaches must evolve in alignment with the fast-changing environment. Recommended efforts to revitalize evaluability assessment practice include the following: engaging stakeholders; clarifying what evaluability assessments entail; assessing program understandings, plausibility, and practicality; and considering cross-cutting themes. This review provides an evidence base of practical applications of evaluability assessments to support future evaluability studies and, by extension, future evaluations.

Aims: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and diabetes mellitus (DM) are both associated with adverse clinical events, but the associations have not been fully elucidated, particularly with concomitant insulin use. This study aimed to analyse the associations between adverse events and DM, as well as adverse events and sole insulin use. Materials and Methods: Our analysis included individuals with AF from the prospective Global Registry on Long‐Term Oral Anti‐Thrombotic Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation (GLORIA‐AF) registry with 3‐year follow‐up. Outcomes included all‐cause death, major bleeding, cardiovascular (CV) death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, thromboembolism and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Results: A total of 15 861 AF individuals were included (age 70.0 ± 10.2 years; 55% male, 20% Asian), of whom, 3666 had DM (age 70.0 ± 9.5 years ; 59% male, 21% Asian). After adjustment, those with DM had higher risks of all‐cause death (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.28–1.66), CV death (HR: 1.53 95% CI: 1.27–1.86), major bleeding (HR: 1.23, 95% CI: 1.01–1.48), MI (HR: 1.50, 95% CI: 1.17–1.94) and MACE (HR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.23–1.63). Compared to individuals with DM receiving oral hypoglycaemic agents, those receiving insulin alone were associated with increased risks of all‐cause death (HR: 2.16, 95% CI: 1.61–2.91), CV death (HR: 2.24, 95% CI: 1.45–3.47), major bleeding (HR: 1.89, 95% CI: 1. 21–2.95), MI (HR: 2.24, 95% CI: 1.31–3.82) and MACE (HR: 2.11, 95% CI: 1.54–2.88). Conclusions: DM was independently associated with higher risks of all‐cause death, CV death, MI, major bleeding and MACE in AF individuals. Individuals receiving insulin alone were associated with higher risks of all‐cause death, CV death, MI, major bleeding and MACE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gender equity is an increasingly discussed priority and cross-cutting theme within international development evaluation. However, it is unclear whether advances being made in evaluating the outcomes in this area are reflected in the scholarly literature. In this context, a fundamental question is: How is gender being addressed in international development evaluation? To answer this question, we conducted a meta-evaluation to identify, synthesize, and assess published evaluation studies in international development with a focus on gender. We searched the Web of Science™ Core Collection database along with nine evaluation-focused journals using variations of the terms 'program evaluation' and 'gender'. A total of 2027 studies were identified, of which 70 met a priori inclusion criteria. Of the reviewed evaluations, many targeted gender-specific programs and specifically women. While the number of studies that report on gender is growing, and nearly all studies included gender-disaggregated data, often only outcomes by 'women' and 'men' were considered without going further to raise larger questions of gender equity. For evaluation to further contribute to gender equity, we suggest that future peer-reviewed evaluation studies provide data on diverse groups of genders, engage with evaluation stakeholders, consider the larger socio-cultural-political context of programming, encourage the use of evaluation findings, and provide actionable recommendations.

Objectives: To elucidate the risk factors for the development of incident hypertension (IHT) in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in axSpA patients who were recruited from 2001 to 2019 from a university clinic in Hong Kong. Patients with HT and/or anti-hypertensive drug use at baseline were excluded. They were followed until the end of 2020. The outcome was IHT, defined by a diagnosis and a prescription for an antihypertensive drug. Baseline and time-varying Cox regression analyses adjusting for age, sex, and body mass index (BMI), were used to assess the relationship between drug use, inflammatory burden, and IHT. Results: Four hundred and thirteen patients [age: 34(25-43) years, male: 319 (77.2%)] were recruited. After a median follow-up of 12 (6-17) years, 58 patients (14%) developed IHT (IHT+group). Among all the baseline variables, disease duration and delay in diagnosis were the independent predictors for IHT based on the Cox regression model. In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, baseline disease duration, delay in diagnosis and time-varying ESR levels were independent predictors associated with an increased risk of IHT. IHT risk was significantly increased in patients with disease duration >5 years. The use of antiinflammatory drugs was not associated with the development of IHT. Conclusion: Higher inflammatory burden as reflected by a longer disease duration, delay diagnosis and higher ESR levels, were predictors associated with IHT after adjusting for traditional CV risk factors. These data support routine screening for hypertension in axSpA patients, especially those with longer disease duration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives This study explored whether the excess cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD) risk in RA could be ameliorated by suppression of inflammation using a treat-to-target (T2T) approach. We compared the CV event (CVE) incidence among ERA patients managed by a T2T strategy with a CV risk factor-matched non-RA population and a historical RA cohort (HRA). Methods This was an observational study using the city-wide hospital data and the ERA registry. ERA patients received T2T management while HRA patients received routine care. Each ERA/HRA patient was matched to three non-RA controls according to age, gender and CV risk factors. Patients on antiplatelet/anticoagulant agents, with pre-existing CVD, chronic kidney disease or other autoimmune diseases were excluded. All subjects were followed for up to 5 years. The primary end point was the first occurrence of a CVE. Results The incidence of CVE in the ERA cohort (n  = 261) and ERA controls were similar with a hazard ratio of 0.53 (95% CI 0.15, 1.79). In contrast, the incidence of CVE in the HRA cohort (n  = 268) was significantly higher than that of the HRA controls with a hazard ratio of 1.9 (95% CI 1.16, 3.13). The incidence of CVE in the ERA cohort was significantly lower than that of the HRA cohort and the difference became insignificant after adjusting for inflammation, the use of methotrexate and traditional CV risk factors. Conclusion ERA patients managed by a T2T strategy did not develop excess CVE compared with CV risk factor-matched controls over 5 years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]