Analytic Framework: Indicators and Measures
A select group of criteria was developed to support transparent and consistent consideration of indicators included in the framework, and definitions for the strength of each indicator were personalized based on criteria.
Working groups of subject matter experts applied the criteria to assess each proposed indicator and determine its value to assess the benefit of the Food Is Medicine intervention.
| Indicator Selection Criteria | High | Moderate | Low |
|---|---|---|---|
| Relevant Reflects an issue that is important to stakeholders and is consistent with measurement dimensions. | Indicator is strongly aligned to present FIM effort and stakeholder priorities | Indicator is generally aligned to FIM effort and stakeholder priorities | Indicator has little or no alignment to FIM effort and stakeholder priorities |
| Actionable Informs policy and resource alignment, alters behavior of health care providers, and/or increases understanding by partnership groups regarding the relationship of food to improve health. | Indicator provides high-value information that can inform policy and practice advancement | Indicator partially provides high-value information that can inform policy and practice advancement | Indicator lacks alignment to high-value information that can inform policy and practice advancement |
| Measurable Reasonably measured within ongoing program implementation settings supported by data sources that efficiently assess the indicator, can be collected across contexts, and minimizes collection burden. | Indicator is specified in terms of measures that can be applied across various contexts and populations | Indicator applies to a limited range of measures that can be applied across various contexts and populations | Indicator has no measures that can be applied across various contexts and populations |
| Sensitive to Change Supports the ability to identify change or lack of change over time rather than static understanding. | Directly affected by one or more intervention | Indirectly affected by one or more intervention | Unaffected by intervention |
| Scientifically Sound Objectively based on valid and reproducible research aligned to high quality measures. | Widely cited as having a valid and reliable causal relationship between the sub-domain and the indicator | Some published evidence of the causal relationship between the sub-domain and the indicator | No published evidence of the relationship between the sub-domain and the indicator |
| Community-valued Considers lived-experience and cultural relevance perspectives and reflected across measurement dimensions. | Indicator is representative of a concept considered important to those with lived-experience | Indicator partially representative of a concept considered important to those with lived-experience | Indicator is not representative of a concept considered important to those with lived-experience |
