Updated: Oct 31st, 2024

Vaccination of Indigenous Population in Queensland Report (Assessment)

Exclusively available on Available only on IvyPanda® • No AI

Table of Contents

Links to Current Policies and Framework
Focus the Evaluation Design and Gathering and Analyzing Evidence
Sampling Plans
Sampling Methods
Timeline
References

Planning in an organization is very critical as it gives direction on what should be done and procedures to be followed. The CDC evaluation model is used in the obtaining of the program policies in healthcare and sickness arresting. The model possesses six steps which are based on feasibility, utility, accuracy, and propriety (CDC, 2021). These steps are involving stakeholders, outlining the program, concentrating on the evaluation perspective, collecting dependable confirmation, supporting conclusions, guaranteeing use, and sharing lessons (CDC, 2021).

The Palm Island Indigenous population is the subject study in which the report shows the need for evaluation to help society and its strategy. Additionally, another objective is to raise the number of people who have received the barge of COVID-19 vaccines.

The CDC evaluation design utilizes the six steps to come up with better implementation and revision of the program strategy. The engagement of stakeholders is the first step where the Australian Government Department of Health and the Queensland Government are mainly involved. The framework gives a comprehensive tool in the vaccination and immunization program. The objectives and goals of the program are discussed in conjunction with its target groups and strategies.

The different stakeholders play unique roles to make the plan a success. The evaluator is responsible for overseeing the future and present outcomes. The evaluation includes the target population involving individuals receiving the vaccine to determine its efficiency. They should maintain their lifestyle and provide relevant feedback and report any issues related to COVID-19. The Queens Health department supports the vaccination and provides a disease-free community. Australia Immunization offers vaccination delivery services, the register monitors coverage, digital health maintains the record and the pharmacovigilance monitors adverse effects after the immunization process.

The description of the program indicates the challenges faced by the target population during the alarming pandemic. The group was underestimated in receiving medical attention during the corona period hence facing high health risks. The aged and people with pre-existing conditions like diabetes, pressure, and obesity were the most affected. A lifestyle that is diverse between the indigenous people and Australians posed a difference in the risk factors faced. False beliefs, lack of knowledge, and unhealthy lifestyles were the most contributing factors.

Links to Current Policies and Framework

The Queensland Government and the Australian Government Department of Health have a framework for the vaccination of COVID-19 for the indigenous population in Queensland.it caters to the population with varying ages as from 12,18, and 60 with the Astra Zeneca and Pfizer vaccines (Melbourne Vaccine Education Centre, 2021). The Australian Government Department of Health has two immunization and vaccination for its people. The table below shows the current policies and frameworks for the program.

Table1: Current Policies and Frameworks

Organization	Resource	Vaccines, diseases, or infections considered
Queensland Government	Queensland COVID-19 vaccination information resource	COVID-19 (“Queensland COVID-19 vaccination,” 2021)
Australian Government Department of Health	Vaccination for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people	Diphtheria, poliomyelitis, tetanus, Hepatitis A, Hepatitis B, measles, mumps, rubella. Smallpox, tuberculosis, influenza, measles, syphilis (“Vaccination for Aboriginal,” 2018).
Australian Government Department of Health	Immunization for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people	Meningococcal B vaccine, pneumococcal disease, hepatitis A, influenza, catch-up vaccines (“Immunisation for Aboriginal,” 2020).
Melbourne Vaccine Education Centre	Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander immunization recommendations	, influenza, meningococcal B and ACWY, COVID-19 vaccines.

Focus the Evaluation Design and Gathering and Analyzing Evidence

An impact evaluation framework is composed of three elements which include the available resources and constraints, the nature of what is being evaluated, and the nature of evaluation itself. Resources include time, staff, money, volunteers, and materials. Illiteracy can impact people’s lives negatively where most may be unaware of simple practices like keeping social distance. Intermediate outcomes such as changes in policies and behavior also have a great impact. Different evaluation designs and methods used include single group (posttest only), single group (pre and posttest), nonequivalent control (pre and post), and single group (time series).

Single group (posttest) involves taking only one measurement at the end of an intervention and its only targets the participants. A single group (pre and post) is where two measurements are taken one before the intervention and another one after (Adeoye et al., 2020). This design is suitable as it gives room for change to be observed appropriately. In a non-equivalent group, two tests are done before and after for two groups (Chesney et al., 2020).

Single group time series involves multiple measures over some time only for the participants. The natural changes are being observed and the external influences. Limitations to the evaluation differ depending on the nature and size of the population. The generalization of data can sometimes give false implications of the trends involved. Age difference, inadequate timing, difficulty in locating documents, and writing reports.

Table 2: Threats to Internal Validity

Type of threat	Explanation or example of how this is a threat for your evaluation: Give an example that may or may not be likely	Discuss (1) if this threat is likely or not given your study design and (2) if it may happen, what can be done about it (if anything).
History	Events such as wars which may lead to death or displacement of people involved in the study.	This threat is unlikely to occur since the government is armed in maintaining peace.
Maturation	Mental or physical changes can take place over some time.	Behavior changes such as keeping social distance can reduce the chances of spreading the virus. This leads to better containment and promoting better health.
Testing	The pre-test results can also affect the post-test outcomes bringing deviation in analysis.	Grouping people according to their similarities and differences can reduce such deviations.
Instrumentation	Measures used in the pre-test and post-test phases differ such as time taken.	Proper timing where the post and pre-test are allocated equal periods to bring uniformity.
Statistical regression	Statistical tendency to change due to the different scores in each test done.	Placing participants in groups according to their scores can lead to regression. Treating the people equally can give uniform scores eliminating the possible defects.
Selection	The criterion used in sampling is not uniform bringing about biasness.	Systematic sampling where considerations are taken first can be a solution.
Mortality	The mortality rate can change as the virus can contribute to more deaths.	Creating awareness on a preventive measure to save the lives of the affected patients.
Diffusion of treatments	This refers to a situation where the control group is affected by the treatment it receives.	It’s unlikely to occur since the socialization of the group is prohibited.
Compensatory equalization	Occurs when the groups in the study do not receive the preferred treatment.	Unlikely to occur since equality is considered to get accurate data.
Compensatory rivalry	Happens when the groups in the study are not receiving the experimental treatment.	Not likely to occur as interventions must be made first before the research.
Resentful demoralization	An issue in a controlled experiment whereby participants become resentful.	Unlikely to occur since equal treatment is given to every member.

Table 3: Threats to External Validity

Type of threat	Explanation or example of how this is a threat for your evaluation	Discuss (1) if this threat is likely or not given your study design and (2) if it may happen, what can be done about it (if anything).
Social desirability	A tendency of research participants to answer questions with biasness.	The interview will be conducted in a manner that encourages participants to be honest.
Expectancy effect	These are effects that are known to influence behavior in a manner that is expected to appear true.	Unlikely to occur since data will be analyzed using valid methods like regression.
Hawthorne effect	Change is the behavior of participants as a result of being observed.	The participants will be aware that research is going place hence need to behave normally.
Placebo effect	Occurs when an improvement in a symptom is noted during the study.	Comparison can be made before and after the disease to note changes.

Sampling Plans

Sampling plans provide a basis on which research is to be conducted. It has five steps that must be followed beginning with the identifying of the parameters to be measured, range of possible values, and needed resolutions (Wu et al., 2018).

A sampling scheme should be designed to determine how and when the data will be collected. Selection of the sample sizes by grouping them if possible by considering similarities and differences. Design of data storage formats if in tables, graphs, or chat formats and finally assigning roles and responsibilities to each stakeholder. The participants were recruited using methods targeting the right audience, screening, incentivizing, and sustaining.

Sampling Methods

Sampling methods like simple random, systematic, and stratified, and cluster were embraced. Simple random sampling provides an equal chance for every member of a population. Tools like random number generators and techniques entirely based on chance are applied. Systematic sampling has similar characteristics to simple but it’s easier to conduct (Li et al., 2018).

Every individual involved in the exercise is listed with a number but they are chosen randomly. Stratified sampling involves small subdivisions of populations into groups and conclusions are drawn (Varshney et al., 2017). Cluster sampling also involves the division of the populations but each group has similar characteristics.

Table 4: Developing an Evaluation Plan

	WHAT (Session 3.1)	HOW (Session 3.1,.3,.5)	WHO (Session 3.3)	WHEN (Session 3.3)	WHERE (Session 3.3)	FROM WHOM (Session 3.3)
Outcome objective ( to reduce the number of isolation patients in homes and hospitals)	The number of positive patients in both units.	Using kits for testing COVID-19 Single group (posttest)	Doctors	Monthly	Hospitals Self-isolation units	Suspected patients in isolation
Impact objective( change in the people attitudes towards the COVID-19 patients around them)	Interaction methods in different locations.	Observations	Research persons	Weekly	Community	Community members
Behavioral objective(washing of hands with soap and running water regularly)	Amount of water used in public places.	Measuring volume	Research persons	Daily	Schools Hospitals Markets	the capacity of water tanks
Learning objective(understanding the nature of the virus, its spread, and prevention measures to be taken)	Several patients testing negative for the virus.	Using testing kits Single group(pre and post-test)	Health officials	Monthly	Hospitals	Patients

Developing an evaluation plan involves the need to achieve the desired objectives. The various methods applied include interviews, observation, single group tests, using test kits and questionnaires (Quek et al., 2017). Personal interviews cover the interrogation on how people been affected by the virus have been coping with the changing lifestyle and how their relationships have changed (Callwood et al., 2018). Observations were made on the general behavior of people, social interaction, and their day-to-day activities. COVID-19 test kits are also used to give quick and accurate tests for treatment and prevention of the spread. The duration of doing the research varies from weekly, monthly, and even daily for observations.

Tools used in data collection were conducting questionnaires and interviews. The questionnaire method is very reliable and cheap to use. It involves making a photocopy of papers consisting of the questions and administering them to the target group. It can be used to collect data from a large audience over a short period (Cumpston et al., 2019).

Both open and closed questions can be used to provide information that can be converted easily into quantitative data (de Block & Vis, 2018). The questions are standardized and can be suitable for all ages as they are easy to respond to. An estimate of 2000 questionnaires can be filled in a day targeting different groups in various locations like churches, schools, and hospitals.

The interview method involves one-to-one interaction where questions are asked and answers were given. It is suitable for obtaining data from a small group of people. It’s very private since the information given is kept confidential (Falissard, 2021). Reliability is seen where similar groups are kept together and the others isolated and them comparison of data is made. An estimate of 500 participants can be interviewed during a day making it very reliable. It is highly flexible and can investigate different issues in a period.

The method is suitable for the target population since they have different preferences. Patients with pre-existing conditions also need privacy for to reveal their statuses (Hampton and Lenhart, 2019). Both quantitative and qualitative measures were taken during the research. Qualitative measurements tend to have a deeper understanding of why something happens (Alam, 2020). Quantitative measures involve data that can be put in numbers. The mortality rate among sick adults was very high due to emaciated immunity (Lederer et al., 2018).

Conducting it privately without the knowledge of the participants showed deviation as to when conducted publicly (Kizlari & Fouseki, 2021). People tend to vary their behavior and they can pretend in some cases or give false implications.

Table 5: Evaluation Plan for the Process Evaluation

Strategy/program component	WHAT KEY QUESTIONS (Session 3.2 and 4.2)	HOW and WHY (Session 3.2, 3.3, 3.5)	TIMING (WHEN) (Session 3.3)
Knowledge	What causes coronavirus?	Taking note of the responses given and critically determining whether the answer is correct. This is because I know the ideal cause of COVID-19.	During the interview
Attitudes	How do you feel when in the isolation units?	Making observations on how the patients behave before answering. A positive reaction would imply acceptance whereas a negative response indicates low esteem.	Daily observation of patients
Self-efficacy	Can you be able to live positively with a family member who is infected?	Using questionnaires method as oral responses may be biased as they may want to sound nice to family.	During interaction with participants.
Behavior	How many times do you wash your hands in a day?	Oral questioning as it may give quick and precise responses.	When in the field
Health status	Do you have any pre-existing health conditions?	Filling questionnaires as privacy may be needed.	Daily administering of questionnaires
Social support	How does the community support you in dealing with the virus?	Interviews	When interrogating the participants
Environmental support	How do the environmental factors affect you?	Observations	Weekly observation s

The various question asked are important in determining the components of the program. Since most people prefer privacy, administering personal questionnaires can give them the confidence to give out relevant information (Nguyen et al., 2020). Making a general observation on how persons conduct themselves in society can give a general view of the new infection. Some responses need to be noted immediately as they occur. Correspondingly, some cases involve the synthesis of raw data to come up with better assumptions.

Table 6: Justifying Conclusions

Issues in the Evaluation	Strategies to Address
Accuracy	Educating the participants on the need to provide accurate information. Informing the target group of the need, to be honest, while answering questions. Estimating variables that can be easily taken without so many struggles.
Feasibility	Providing more resources such as questionnaires used in data collection. Setting aside enough time for researching to get accurate data. Training the researchers on how to apply various methods and how to conduct themselves in the field.
Cultural differences	Learning about different cultures Embracing cultural diversity Ensuring polite and clear communication
Ethical issues	Introducing policies Educating members on the need to value ethics
Confidentiality	Storing information in private systems (Zucker et al., 2019) Creating confidentiality agreements

Accuracy calls upon the nature of the problems and behaviors to be observed. Distinct variables are preferred since they give researchers easy time. Awareness should be made on why such an activity is taking place, its importance, and its relevance in the general wellbeing of all the individuals (Pennycook et al., 2020). Honesty value should be emphasized since wrong data can lead to delicate decisions in the final state. The culture of a community is sensitive and must be respected (Mariani et al., 2018). One must learn to be compatible with other cultures despite of their uniqueness. Ethical issues must be adhered to by all and equal treatment of persons must be adopted Feasibility issues refer to the inadequate resources, time, and background knowledge on how to conduct the research. To accomplish the tasks in demand, enough resources must be available and be easy to access (Southwood, 2018). Tools used in data collection must be available and valid to minimize on errors. Having prior information in theoretical form enables its application easily.

Table 7: Use and Share of Lessons Learnt

Key Stakeholders, I Need to Communicate With	Appropriate Format/S Of Results for this Stakeholder	Ways to Ensure my Findings Get Used by this Stakeholder
1. Health promotion planners	Online websites specifically for the research in discussion	Encouraging them to evaluate findings to check for possible errors.
2. Palm Island Community Company(PICC) Health Workers	Presenting filled questionnaires and data collected among the various groups.	Creating a meeting and involving them in going through the questionnaires
3. Health professionals	Creating online portals for patients where the doctors can retrieve them during emergencies (Gefen et al., 2017).	Encouraging participants to visit hospitals for further treatments
4. Digital health	Entering data in computers where they can access easily	Giving those passwords and tasks of manipulating data to do a comparison.
5. General public	Passing messages through digital devices such as mobile phones.	Administering the vaccine for COVID-19 and calling the patients who tested positive to take it.

To ensure that the information gathered is effectively used and analyzed, all the stakeholders must be involved. Monitoring on the use of data by creating online portals for patients to interact with doctors. They can get appropriate guidance on what to do when faced with any emergencies and possible first aids. Members of the public can go for the vaccines to protect themselves from exposure.

Timeline

	April	May	June	July	August	September	October	November
Finding a research area
Creating research questions
Selecting research methodology
Writing a research proposal
Identifying participants
Conducting literature review
Collection of data
Analyzing data
Writing of the first draft
Writing of the second draft
Final draft								18

The procedure shown above was relevant in providing a guideline on the evaluation. The first thing was to select a research area (Palm Island Indigenous Population). Research questions gave direction on what to identify and the unique features. methodologies applied were conducting interviews and conducting of questionnaires. Common open and closed questions were asked to determine the wave nature of the virus (Yassouridis et al., 2018). Various groups of participants included people of all ages with their diversity. Data analysis was done using regression mean to determine variance. after all this was done, the first, second, and final drafts were written to sum up the evaluation.

In conclusion, the CDC framework must follow all the six steps for it to be complete. The plan to vaccinate the Palm Island Indigenous Population followed the procedure as it was the most appropriate. The engagement of stakeholders solved the gap of low income and other economic factors hindering them from receiving better services.

Majorly, the government of Australians response was critical. Describing the plan by considering possible risk factors and poor communication created a strong foundation and path to be followed. Goals and objectives set created better pathways to the achievement. Educating the target group and creating governing policies such as wearing masks and keeping social distance.

Evaluation designs and methods used include single group (posttest only), single group (pre and posttest), non-equivalent control (pre and post), and single group (time series). They were able to show the trends of data and variations whenever possible. Threats to both internal and external validity were also examined deeply. Program components like knowledge, attitude, behavior, self-efficacy, and health status, social and environmental support. Ensuring use and share of lessons learned by recalling the stakeholders involved and looking for ways to ensure the finding are used.

References

Adeoye, J., Wan, C., & Thomson, P. (2020). An appraisal of pivotal evaluation designs in validating noninvasive biomarkers for head and neck cancer detection. Acta Oncologica, 59(12), 1500-1502.

Alam, M. (2020). A systematic qualitative case study: Questions, data collection, NVivo analysis, and saturation.Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 16(1), 1-31.

Australian Government Department of Health. (2021). Immunization for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

Belk, R. (2020). Ethical issues in service robotics and artificial intelligence. The Service Industries Journal, 1-17.

Callwood, A., Jeevaratnam, K., Kotronoulas, G., Schneider, A., Lewis, L., & Nadarajah, V. (2018). Personal domains assessed in multiple mini interviews (MMIs) for healthcare student selection: A narrative synthesis systematic review. Nurse Education Today, 64, 56-64.

CDC. (2021).Framework for Program Evaluation – CDC. Cdc.gov.

Chesney, T., Bogach, J., Devaud, N., Govindarajan, A., & Wright, F. (2020). How we did it: creating virtual interviews for postgraduate medical trainee recruitment and keeping it personal. Annals of Surgery, 273(2), e60-e62.

Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M., Chandler, J., Welch, V., Higgins, J., & Thomas, J. (2019). Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Web.

de Block, D., & Vis, B. (2018). Addressing the challenges related to transforming qualitative into quantitative data in qualitative comparative analysis. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(4), 503-535.

Falissard, B. (2021). The future of evaluation of the child and adolescent psychiatric treatments. IACAPAP Arxiv. Web.

Gefen, R., Bruno, M., & Abujudeh, H. (2017). Online portals: Gateway to patient-centered radiology. American Journal of Roentgenology, 209(5), 987-991.

Hampton, M., & Lenhart, O. (2019). The effect of the Affordable Care Act preexisting conditions provision on marriage. Health Economics, 28(11), 1345-1355.

Kizlyar, D., & Fouseki, K. (2018). Treating resistance as data in qualitative interviews. The Qualitative Report. Web.

Lederer, J., Fellner, J., Gassner, A., Gruhler, K., & Schiller, G. (2021). Determining the material intensities of buildings selected by random sampling: A case study from Vienna.Journal of Industrial Ecology, 25(4), 848-863.

Li, L., Yao, Y., Yao, M., & Goodman, E. (2018). Detecting frequency from randomly sampled data implementation of random sampling in Bratumass. SPG Biomed.

Mariani, M., Borghi, M., & Okumus, F. (2020). Unraveling the effects of cultural differences in the online appraisal of hospitality and tourism services.International Journal of Hospitality Management, 90, 102606.

Nguyen, T., Karney, B., & Bradbury, T. (2020). When poor communication does and does not matter: The moderating role of stress. Journal of Family Psychology, 34(6), 676-686.

Pennycook, G., McPhetres, J., Zhang, Y., Lu, J., & Rand, D. (2020). Fighting COVID-19 misinformation on social media: Experimental evidence for a scalable accuracy-nudge intervention.Psychological Science, 31(7), 770-780.

Quek, J., Brauer, S., Treleaven, J., & Clark, R. (2017).The concurrent validity and interrater reliability of the Microsoft Kinect to measure thoracic kyphosis.International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 40(3), 279-284.

Queensland COVID-19 vaccination information resource. (2021). Queensland Government. Web.

Southwood, N. (2018). The feasibility issue.Philosophy Compass, 13(8).

Vaccination for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. (2018). Australian Government Department of Health. Web.

Wu, C., Shu, M., & Chang, Y. (2018). Variable-sampling plans based on lifetime-performance index under exponential distribution with censoring and its extensions.Applied Mathematical Modelling, 55, 81-93.

Yassouridis, C., Ernst, D., & Leisch, F. (2018). Generalization, combination, and extension of functional clustering algorithms: The R package fancy. Journal of Statistical Software, 85(9).

Varshney, R., Gupta, S., & Ali, I. (2017). An optimum multivariate-multiobjective stratified sampling design: Fuzzy programming Approach.Pakistan Journal of Statistics and Operation Research, 13(4), 829.

Zucker, N., Schmitt, C., DeJonckheere, M., Nichols, L., Plegue, M., & Chang, T. (2019). Confidentiality in the doctor-patient relationship: perspectives of youth ages 14-24 Years. The Journal of Pediatrics, 213, 196-202.

More related papers Related Essay Examples