Building a Logic Model to Foster Engagement and Learning Using the Case of a Province-Wide Multispecies Antimicrobial Use Monitoring System

Antoine Boudreau LeBlanc, Aude Motulsky, Marie-Pierre Moreault, Man Qing Liang, Ida Ngueng Feze and Luc Des Côteaux

Evaluation Review, 2024, vol. 48, issue 4, 736-765

Abstract: Successfully designing and implementing a program is complex; it requires a reflexive balance between the available resources and the priorities of various stakeholders, both of which change over time. Logic models are theory-based evaluation approaches used to identify and address key challenges of a program. This article describes the process of building a logic model on advanced theories in complexity studies. The models aim to support a province-wide multispecies monitoring system of antimicrobial use (AMU), designed in collaboration with the animal health sector in Quebec (Canada). Based on a rigorous theoretical foundation, the logic model is built in three steps: (1) mapping , a narrative review of literature on similar programs in other jurisdictions; (2) framing, iterative consultations with project members to elaborate the logic model; (3) shaping , hypotheses based on the logic model. The model emerges from the reflexive balancing of current scientific knowledge and empirical insights to gather relevant information about stakeholders from interdisciplinary experts that led a 3-year consensus-building process within the community. Recognizing the challenge of unpacking theories for practical use, we illustrate how the process of an “open†logic model building could enable governance coordination in complex processes. Logic models are useful for evaluating public, private, and academic partnerships in One Health programs that characterize an adaptive governance process.

Keywords: antibiotics monitoring system; animal health; innovation system; complex intervention; program success; logic model (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X231198706 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:evarev:v:48:y:2024:i:4:p:736-765

DOI: 10.1177/0193841X231198706

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Evaluation Review
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().