Case study of evaluations that go beyond clinical outcomes to assess quality improvement diabetes programmes using the Diabetes Evaluation Framework for Innovative National Evaluations (DEFINE).

Rationale, aims and objectivesInvestments in efforts to reduce the burden of diabetes on patients and health care are critical; however, more evaluation is needed to provide evidence that informs and supports future policies and programmes. The newly developed Diabetes Evaluation Framework for Innovative National Evaluations (DEFINE) incorporates the theoretical concepts needed to facilitate the capture of critical information to guide investments, policy and programmatic decision making. The aim of the study is to assess the applicability and value of DEFINE in comprehensive real-world evaluation. MethodUsing a critical and positivist approach, this intrinsic and collective case study retrospectively examines two naturalistic evaluations to demonstrate how DEFINE could be used when conducting real-world comprehensive evaluations in health care settings. ResultsThe variability between the cases and the evaluation designs are described and aligned to the DEFINE goals, steps and sub-steps. The majority of the theoretical steps of DEFINE were exemplified in both cases, although limited for knowledge translation efforts. Application of DEFINE to evaluate diverse programmes that target various chronic diseases is needed to further test the inclusivity and built-in flexibility of DEFINE and its role in encouraging more comprehensive knowledge translation. ConclusionsThis case study shows how DEFINE could be used to structure or guide comprehensive evaluations of programmes and initiatives implemented in health care settings and support scale-up of successful innovations. Future use of the framework will continue to strengthen its value in guiding programme evaluation and informing health policy to reduce the burden of diabetes and other chronic diseases.