Using Random Allocation to Evaluate Social Interventions
Three Recent U.K. Examples
Datos Bibliográficos
Although widely accepted in medicine and health services research, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are often viewed with hostility by social scientists, who cite a variety of reasons as to why this approach to evaluation cannot be used to research social interventions. This article discusses the three central themes in these debates, which are those of science, ethics, and feasibility. The article uses three recent U.K. trials of social interventions (day care for preschool children, social support for disadvantaged families, and peer-led sex education for young people) to consider issues relating to the use of random allocation for social intervention evaluation and to suggest some practical strategies for the successful implementation of “social” RCTs. The article argues that the criteria of science, ethics, and feasibility can and should apply to social intervention trials in just the same way as they do to clinical trials
Alternative medicine · Clinical trial · Disadvantaged · Hostility · Intervention (counseling · Medical education · Political science · Psychological intervention · Randomized controlled trial · Evaluation and Performance Assessment · Food Security and Health in Diverse Populations · Health Policy Implementation Science · Law · Medicine · Nursing · Psychology · Social Psychology
Teacher education research in the UK
The dos and don’ts of influencing policy
Integrating behavioural insights in the policy process
Using evidence to improve policy and practice
Mutual misunderstanding and avoidance, misrepresentations and disciplinary politics
Meeting the Challenge of Doing an RCT Evaluation of Youth Mentoring in Ireland
From Ethnography to Randomized Controlled Trial
Policy experiments
The Need for Experimental Methodology in Intimate Partner Violence
Good intentions and received wisdom are not good enough
Quantitative analysis at local and national level
L’intervention de type criminologique à l’aune de la Collaboration Cochrane
Randomized Experiments for Planning and Evaluation
Interventions to reduce unintended pregnancies among adolescents
Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health
Experiments in knowing
A Comparison of Students' Evaluations of a Peer-delivered Sex Education Programme and Teacher-led Provision
The health and welfare effects of day-care
Social Science and the Evidence-based Policy Movement
Including Culturally Diverse Samples in Health Research
Evaluating Social Work Effectiveness
Making Evidence‐based Practice Educational
The Need for Randomised Controlled Trials in Educational Research
| Obras citantes distintas | 12 |
|---|---|
| Citas por año | 0,71 |
| Intervalo de citas | 2009 - 2025 (17) |
| Velocidad de citación | recent |
| Altamente citado | No |
| Tipos de cita | Neutras: 11 |