Process evaluations for cluster-randomised trials of complex interventions: a proposed framework for design and reporting
نویسندگان
چکیده
BACKGROUND Process evaluations are recommended to open the 'black box' of complex interventions evaluated in trials, but there is limited guidance to help researchers design process evaluations. Much current literature on process evaluations of complex interventions focuses on qualitative methods, with less attention paid to quantitative methods. This discrepancy led us to develop our own framework for designing process evaluations of cluster-randomised controlled trials. METHODS We reviewed recent theoretical and methodological literature and selected published process evaluations; these publications identified a need for structure to help design process evaluations. We drew upon this literature to develop a framework through iterative exchanges, and tested this against published evaluations. RESULTS The developed framework presents a range of candidate approaches to understanding trial delivery, intervention implementation and the responses of targeted participants. We believe this framework will be useful to others designing process evaluations of complex intervention trials. We also propose key information that process evaluations could report to facilitate their identification and enhance their usefulness. CONCLUSION There is no single best way to design and carry out a process evaluation. Researchers will be faced with choices about what questions to focus on and which methods to use. The most appropriate design depends on the purpose of the process evaluation; the framework aims to help researchers make explicit their choices of research questions and methods. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01425502.
منابع مشابه
Parallel process evaluation using a proposed framework for the design and reporting of process evaluations for cluster-randomised trials of complex interventions
Process evaluations are recommended to open the ‘black box’ of complex interventions evaluated in trials, but there is limited guidance to help with design, with most guidance focused on the use of qualitative methods rather than processes to evaluate. We have developed a framework that identifies a range of candidate processes that an evaluation could examine to understand clusterrandomised in...
متن کاملAnalysis and comment Health services research Process evaluation in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions
“Complex interventions” are health service interventions that are not drugs or surgical procedures, but have many potential “active ingredients.” A complex intervention combines different components in a whole that is more than the sum of its parts. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are the most rigorous way to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions, regardless of their complexity. Becau...
متن کاملInadequate reporting of research ethics review and informed consent in cluster randomised trials: review of random sample of published trials
OBJECTIVES To investigate the extent to which authors of cluster randomised trials adhered to two basic requirements of the World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' uniform requirements for manuscripts (namely, reporting of research ethics review and informed consent), to determine whether the adequacy of reporting has impro...
متن کاملIt Is Not That Simple nor Compelling!; Comment on “Translating Evidence Into Healthcare Policy and Practice: Single Versus Multi-faceted Implementation Strategies – Is There a Simple Answer to a Complex Question?”
Healthcare decisions are often made under pressure, with varying levels of information in a changing clinical context. With limited resources and a focus on improving patient outcomes, healthcare managers and health professionals strive to implement both clinical and cost-effective care. However, the gap between research evidence and health policy/clinical practice persists despite our best eff...
متن کاملPro’s and con’s of the stepped wedge design in cluster randomised trials of quality improvement interventions: two current examples
The stepped wedge design, under which all trial participants receive the intervention but the order in which the intervention is received is randomised, is potentially useful to rigorously evaluate organisational interventions to improve quality and safety. We use two examples of cluster-randomised steppedwedge trials (DQIP and GP-POLY) to illustrate advantages and disadvantages of the design i...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره 14 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2013