Conducting Randomized Controlled Trials of Complex Interventions in Prisons
A Sisyphean Task
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 15520577 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Charlotte Lennox (0000-0001-9014-9965, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, corresponding author), Sarah Léonard (0000-0001-8511-3829, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre), Jane Senior (0000-0002-7133-4898, University of Manchester), Caroline Hendricks (University of Manchester), Sarah Rybczynska‐bunt (0000-0002-4284-1081, University of Plymouth), Sarah Rybczynska-Bunt, Cath Quinn (0000-0003-4644-4603, University of Plymouth), Richard Byng (0000-0001-7411-9467, University of Plymouth), Jenny Shaw (0000-0003-2569-7687, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 13 |
| Pages | 839958-839958 |
| Publication date | 2022-05-03 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Frontiers in Psychiatry (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1664-0640 • E-ISSN: 1664-0640 |
| Publisher | Frontiers Media (PUBLISHER • CH) |
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.839958 |
| PMID | 35592376 |
| OpenAlex | W4225315120 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 52 |
Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) are the "gold standard" for measuring the effectiveness of an intervention. However, they have their limitations and are especially complex in prison settings. Several systematic reviews have highlighted some of the issues, including, institutional constraints e.g., "lock-downs," follow-ups, contamination of allocation conditions and a reliance on self-report measures. In this article, we reflect on our experiences and will describe two RCTs. People in prison are a significantly disadvantaged and vulnerable group, ensuring equitable and effective interventions is key to reducing inequality and promoting positive outcomes. We ask are RCTs of complex interventions in prisons a sisyphean task? We certainly don't think so, but we propose that current accepted practice and research designs may be limiting our understanding and ability to test complex interventions in the real-world context of prisons. RCTs will always have their place, but designs need to be flexible and adaptive, with the development of other rigorous methods for evaluating impact of interventions e.g., non-randomized studies, including pre-post implementation studies. With robust research we can deliver quality evidence-based healthcare in prisons - after all the degree of civilization in a society is revealed by entering its prisons
Context (archaeology · Criminology · Disadvantaged · Intervention (counseling · MEDLINE · Political science · Prison · Psychological intervention · Public relations · Randomized controlled trial · Systematic review · Advanced Causal Inference Techniques · Applied Psychology · Health Policy Implementation Science · Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life · Law · Medicine · Nursing · Psychology
Acceptability and feasibility of Problem Management Plus to address mental health problems among remand prisoners in the Netherlands
The Effectiveness of Trauma-Focused Interventions With Individuals Who Perpetrated Crimes
Philosophy programs in prison and rehabilitative outcomes – A scoping review
Identifying potential barriers and enablers to smoking abstinence after leaving a smokefree prison using the capabilities, opportunities, motivations -behaviour (COM-B) model
What Works for Female Offenders
Mental health of prisoners
Acceptability of healthcare interventions
Use of qualitative methods alongside randomised controlled trials of complex healthcare interventions
Enhancing Treatment Fidelity in Health Behavior Change Studies
A conceptual framework for implementation fidelity
Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health
A review of research on fidelity of implementation
A new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions
Process evaluation of complex interventions
Are Psychological Treatments for Adults With Histories of Violent Offending Associated With Change in Dynamic Risk Factors? A Meta-Analysis of Intermediate Treatment Outcomes
Engaging “seldom heard” groups in research and intervention development
The Effectiveness of Correctional Rehabilitation
Effects of Correctional-Based Programs for Female Inmates
A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials of Interventions to Improve the Health of Persons During Imprisonment and in the Year After Release
Clarifying realist analytic and interdisciplinary consensus processes in a complex health intervention
Building programme theory to develop more adaptable and scalable complex interventions
| Unique citing works | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 4 |
| Citation span | 2025 - 2026 (2) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 4 |