Some have suggested that a multiplicative model best fits the intent
of the model that all five dimensions are equally important, and that
if a program has a zero value on any dimension, that its overall public
health impact will be zero. This builds upon the increasingly accepted
notion of Reach X Efficacy = Impact to become
Public Health Impact = R x E x A x I x M.
Others object to such formulas and feel that there is no one best way
to combine the RE-AIM elements. One approach that allows users to define
their own criteria and to emphasize the issues that are most important
to them is to visually display different programs on the RE-AIM dimensions
so that the strengths and limitations of different programs can be quickly
seen. Examples of such visual displays can be viewed by clicking on the "example" icons
below.
Sample Visual Displays
Interactive Technologies versus In-Person Counseling
for Diabetes Self-Management: Comparison of RE-AIM Capabilities
1 [Click
on arrow to open the figure in a new window.] This figure visually displays
the relative strengths and limitations of interactive computer vs. in-person
based behavior
change
counseling along the various
RE-AIM dimensions (higher scores are better on the hypothetical scale).
Display of Two Different Intervention Programs on Various RE-AIM
Dimensions
2 [Click
on arrow to open the figure in a new window.] This
figure visually displays the hypothetical performance of a group counseling
program versus a policy approach to smoking behavior change on the various
RE-AIM dimensions (higher scores are better on the hypothetical scale).
Articles containing visual displays of RE-AIM dimensions:
Glasgow,
R.E., McKay, H.G., Piette, J.D., Reynolds, K.D. (2001) The RE-AIM
framework for evaluating interventions: What can it tell us about
approaches to chronic illness management? Patient Education and
Counseling, 44:119-127.
Glasgow,
R.E., & Bull, S. (2001). Making a difference with interactive
technology: Considerations in using and evaluating computerized aids
for diabetes self-management education. Diabetes Spectrum,
14(2): 99-106