An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure-the arts as a vehicle for knowledge translation and exchange (KTE) in public health during a pandemic: a realist-informed developmental evaluation research protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 crisis has led to the adoption of strict and coercive preventive measures. The implementation of these measures has generated negative impacts for many communities. The situation is especially worrisome for Indigenous communities in Peru. Therefore, it is necessary to recognise the contribution of the experiential knowledge of Indigenous communities and to implement innovative approaches. The use of art can be a promising avenue for working in partnership with Indigenous communities.The goal of this research is to (1) develop an intervention promoting barrier measures and vaccination to limit the transmission of COVID-19 among Indigenous communities using an arts-based and community-based knowledge translation and exchange (ACKTE) model; and (2) understand the contextual elements and mechanisms associated with the process of developing a preventive intervention using the ACKTE model. METHODOLOGY AND ANALYSIS: This research will take place in Indigenous communities in Peru and will be based on a developmental evaluation guided by the principles of realist evaluation. Members of two Indigenous communities, local authorities, health professionals and artists will participate in the intervention development process as well as in the developmental evaluation. For data collection, we will conduct modified talking circles and semistructured individual interviews with stakeholders as well as an analysis of documents and artistic works produced. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION OF RESULTS: This research received the approval of the Université du Québec à Rimouski's research ethics board. In addition to scientific articles, the results of this research will be disseminated through videos and during an artistic performance.

Addressing equity in interventions to reduce air pollution in urban areas: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: We did a systematic review to assess quantitative studies investigating the association between interventions aiming to reduce air pollution, health benefits and equity effects. METHODS: Three databases were searched for studies investigating the association between evaluated interventions aiming to reduce air pollution and heath-related benefits. We designed a two-stage selection process to judge how equity was assessed and we systematically determined if there was a heterogeneous effect of the intervention between subgroups or subareas. RESULTS: Of 145 identified articles, 54 were reviewed in-depth with eight satisfying the inclusion criteria. This systematic review showed that interventions aiming to reduce air pollution in urban areas have a positive impact on air quality and on mortality rates, but the documented effect on equity is less straightforward. CONCLUSIONS: Integration of equity in evidence-based public health is a great challenge nowadays. In this review we draw attention to the importance of considering equity in air pollution interventions. We also propose further methodological and theoretical challenges when assessing equity in interventions to reduce air pollution and we present opportunities to develop this research area.

LOGIC ANALYSIS: TESTING PROGRAM THEORY TO BETTER EVALUATE COMPLEX INTERVENTIONS.

Evaluating complex interventions requires an understanding of the program's logic of action. Logic analysis, a specific type of program theory evaluation based on scientific knowledge, can help identify either the critical conditions for achieving desired outcomes or alternative interventions for that purpose. In this article, we outline the principles of logic analysis and its roots. We then illustrate its use with an actual evaluation case. Finally, we discuss the advantages of conducting logic analysis prior to other types of evaluations. This article will provide evaluators with both theoretical and practical information to help them in conceptualizing their evaluations.

ÉVALUER UNE INTERVENTION COMPLEXE: ENJEUX CONCEPTUELS, MÉTHODOLOGIQUES, ET OPÉRATIONNELS.

Theoretically, evaluation should help decision-makers address contemporary health system challenges. Paradoxically, the use of evaluation results by decision-makers remains poor, despite rapid development in the evaluation field. The level of use depends on the evaluator's ability to account for the complexity of health-care systems. The complex nature of an intervention often compels evaluators to adopt unconventional approaches to account for the roles of the players. The evaluation of a complex intervention raises conceptual, methodological, and operational challenges the evaluation has to overcome to increase the level of use of its findings by decision-makers.

DISCUSSION: PRACTICE-BASED EVALUATION AS A RESPONSE TO ADRESS INTERVENTION COMPLEXITY.

The aim of this special issue of the Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation was to present an overview of current practices in the field of evaluation of complex interventions. Seasoned evaluators described their approaches to these types of evaluation in the healthcare context. Building upon their contributions, this synthesis offers a cross-sectional reading of their experiences, highlighting the common and divergent features of their approaches as well as their most pressing concerns and interests.