What question did this study set out to answer?

June 12, 2026Wellcome Open Research0 citationsOpen Access

Developing Evaluation Guidance for Climate-Health Interventions: A Study Protocol for a Modified Delphi Process under the Pathfinder Initiative

RNRebecca NewbouldUniversity of London IBIris Martine BlomLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine KBKatie BigmoreLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine

Key Points

The aim is to develop comprehensive evaluation guidance for climate-health interventions using a modified Delphi process.
Utilized a modified Delphi process consisting of three survey rounds with Likert-scale ratings and qualitative workshops.
Recruited 20-40 panellists through purposive and snowball sampling to ensure diverse perspectives.
Defined consensus as median scores with an inter-quartile range of ≤1.5 and agreement scores of 70%.
Identified gaps in existing evaluation frameworks through systematic literature review and practitioners' survey.
Developed a structured evaluation guidance based on diverse expert opinions from high-income and low- and middle-income countries.
Ensured ethical approval and plan for dissemination through peer-reviewed publications.

Abstract

Introduction Climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies can offer multiple benefits for human health outcomes in the near and long term, often referred to as co-benefits when they are ancillary to the primary objective. These are most obvious when implementation is sufficiently ambitious and responsive to context. However, existing evaluation frameworks do not adequately support measurement of the impacts of complex climate-health interventions, resulting in inconsistent evidence on effectiveness, scale up and transferability, in some cases risking ‘greenwashing’ or maladaptation. Existing guidance on the development and evaluation of complex interventions provides an opportunity to integrate environmental and systems perspectives, and to include diverse voices and ways of knowing. This protocol describes a modified Delphi process to develop comprehensive, equitable evaluation guidance for development and evaluation of climate-health interventions. Methods and Analysis The Delphi process will be constructed of three survey rounds, each with quantitative Likert-scale ratings of key items and a qualitative discussion workshop, designed to resolve disagreements and refine item definitions at the end of each round. Consensus will be defined using median scores, an inter-quartile range of ≤1.5 and an agreement score of 70%. Purposive and snowball sampling will be used to recruit 20–40 panellists to a Delphi panel, aiming for a broad mix of expertise with even representation of perspectives across high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (L&MICs). The Delphi survey tool and process will be informed by a systematic review of existing frameworks and a preliminary survey to elucidate practitioners’ opinions on the gaps in the existing guidance and the priority focal areas for consensus building. Ethics and Dissemination Ethics approval has been obtained from the Observational Research Ethics Committee, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) (Ref: 32889). Findings will be disseminated via a peer-reviewed publication and online supporting materials.

Ask AI

Helpful

Bookmark

View Full Paper