6 Participant selection was done

based on people’s experi

6 Participant selection was done

based on people’s experiences about developing or implementing tobacco control legislations as policy-makers, tobacco selling and its profits as beneficiaries, and the Buparlisib concentration community as a whole. To that end, three major groups were purposefully selected: policy-makers, stakeholders, and community members. The sample size was determined through data saturation (i.e., sampling until informational redundancy or saturation was achieved).7 Field observation and semi-structured Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical individual interviews were done. Primary indicators were extracted from literature review and the NCTCP, and enforcement instructions were used to develop the general questions. All interviews were in-depth semi-structured and were done with the interviewees’ oral consent. Data collection was performed by the Glaser and Strauss approach.8 The useful units of meaning in the interview

transcripts were used as first-level codes. The concepts of the first level codes were determined Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical and after merging Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical some similar concepts, second-level codes were derived.7 “Evaluation indicators” were defined for all types of evaluation (i.e., impact, process, and outcome) based on the second-level codes. Thereafter, a scientific committee was convened to review the results, finalize the evaluation indicators, and select some as “applied evaluation indicators”. The committee members recommended that the “applied indicators” be considered in the evaluation questionnaire. Results Thirteen policy-makers, 76 stakeholders, Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical and 146 community members were interviewed. A total of 617 first-level codes and 251 second-level codes were extracted. All the second-level codes were used to synthesize indicators. After obtaining the committee Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical members’ opinions, 82 indicators were designated as “applied indicators”. tables 1, ​,22 and ​and33 show the “applied indicators” according to the target group and type of indicators. As is shown in table 1, we extracted 24 indicators

for policy-makers’ evaluation, in which 2, 3, and 19 indicators belong to outcome, impact, and process evaluation, respectively. From the 27 indicators for stakeholders’ Vasopressin Receptor evaluation, 2 indicators evaluate outcomes, 10 indicators evaluate impact, and 15 indicators evaluate the implementation process of the FCTC. Unlike policy-makers and stakeholders, in the community study, most of the 31 indicators belong to impact evaluation (20 indicators) (table 3). Table 1 Applied indicators used to evaluate tobacco control regulations in policy-makers Table 2 Applied indicators used to evaluate tobacco control regulations in stakeholders Table 3 Applied indicators used to evaluate tobacco control regulations in the community Discussion The government and policy-makers in Iran are responsible not only for tobacco control but also for its production, import, pricing, and taxation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>