Thanks. Allow me to weigh in. I think we should view prevention more broadly. What you mention is primary prevention. If secondary and tertiary prevention are considered then the line between cure and prevention gets blurred, and so does the measurement of impacts (in some respects). Those who are sick with infectious or non-communicable conditions) or injured still need knowledge to recover faster or to manage their conditions in a manner that affords them some desired quality of life.
Then there is the important matter of applying health knowledge (evidence) to public policies in a way that shapes the macro-environment. In short, this (how knowledge saves lives) is a grey area that requires conceptual and theoretical thinking and then translating that to the evaluation practice.
HIFA profile: Camlus Odhus is a MPH candidate at the University of Liverpool (UK), and is based in Kenya. Professional interests: I am interested in the full continuum of maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH); but with a heavy leaning towards community-based healthcare. Other interests include advocacy on the Human Right to Health, Social Determinants, of Health and Health Policy dialogue. codhus20 AT gmail.com