Process evaluation in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 16 February 2006
- Vol. 332 (7538) , 413-416
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.332.7538.413
Abstract
Most randomised controlled trials focus on outcomes, not on the processes involved in implementing an intervention. Using an example from school based health promotion, this paper argues that including a process evaluation would improve the science of many randomised controlled trialsKeywords
This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- Evaluating ProcessesEvaluation, 2004
- Pupil-led sex education in England (RIPPLE study): cluster-randomised intervention trialThe Lancet, 2004
- Complex interventions: how “out of control” can a randomised controlled trial be?BMJ, 2004
- A school-based randomized controlled trial of peer-led sex education in EnglandControlled Clinical Trials, 2003
- Unpacking the ‘black box’: the importance of process data to explain outcomesPublished by Oxford University Press (OUP) ,2003
- Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventionsJournal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 2002
- Peer-delivered health promotion for young people: A systematic review of different study designsHealth Education Journal, 2001
- Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve healthBMJ, 2000
- Behavioural intervention trials for HIV/STD prevention in schools: are they feasible?Sexually Transmitted Infections, 1998
- The role of conceptual frameworks in epidemiological analysis: a hierarchical approach.International Journal of Epidemiology, 1997