Blog
About

  • Record: found
  • Abstract: found
  • Article: found
Is Open Access

Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance

Read this article at

Bookmark
      There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

      Abstract

      Evaluating complex interventions is complicated. The Medical Research Council's evaluation framework (2000) brought welcome clarity to the task. Now the council has updated its guidance

      Related collections

      Most cited references 28

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      A taxonomy of behavior change techniques used in interventions.

      Without standardized definitions of the techniques included in behavior change interventions, it is difficult to faithfully replicate effective interventions and challenging to identify techniques contributing to effectiveness across interventions. This research aimed to develop and test a theory-linked taxonomy of generally applicable behavior change techniques (BCTs). Twenty-six BCTs were defined. Two psychologists used a 5-page coding manual to independently judge the presence or absence of each technique in published intervention descriptions and in intervention manuals. Three systematic reviews yielded 195 published descriptions. Across 78 reliability tests (i.e., 26 techniques applied to 3 reviews), the average kappa per technique was 0.79, with 93% of judgments being agreements. Interventions were found to vary widely in the range and type of techniques used, even when targeting the same behavior among similar participants. The average agreement for intervention manuals was 85%, and a comparison of BCTs identified in 13 manuals and 13 published articles describing the same interventions generated a technique correspondence rate of 74%, with most mismatches (73%) arising from identification of a technique in the manual but not in the article. These findings demonstrate the feasibility of developing standardized definitions of BCTs included in behavioral interventions and highlight problematic variability in the reporting of intervention content.
        Bookmark
        • Record: found
        • Abstract: found
        • Article: not found

        Extending the CONSORT statement to randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatment: explanation and elaboration.

        Adequate reporting of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) is necessary to allow accurate critical appraisal of the validity and applicability of the results. The CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) Statement, a 22-item checklist and flow diagram, is intended to address this problem by improving the reporting of RCTs. However, some specific issues that apply to trials of nonpharmacologic treatments (for example, surgery, technical interventions, devices, rehabilitation, psychotherapy, and behavioral intervention) are not specifically addressed in the CONSORT Statement. Furthermore, considerable evidence suggests that the reporting of nonpharmacologic trials still needs improvement. Therefore, the CONSORT group developed an extension of the CONSORT Statement for trials assessing nonpharmacologic treatments. A consensus meeting of 33 experts was organized in Paris, France, in February 2006, to develop an extension of the CONSORT Statement for trials of nonpharmacologic treatments. The participants extended 11 items from the CONSORT Statement, added 1 item, and developed a modified flow diagram. To allow adequate understanding and implementation of the CONSORT extension, the CONSORT group developed this elaboration and explanation document from a review of the literature to provide examples of adequate reporting. This extension, in conjunction with the main CONSORT Statement and other CONSORT extensions, should help to improve the reporting of RCTs performed in this field.
          Bookmark
          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.

            Bookmark

            Author and article information

            Affiliations
            [1 ]MRC Population Health Sciences Research Network, Glasgow G12 8RZ
            [2 ]Nuffield Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Oxford, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford OX3 7LD
            [3 ]MRC Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, Glasgow G12 8RZ
            [4 ]Centre for Outcomes Research and Effectiveness, University College London, London WC1E 7HB
            [5 ]MRC General Practice Research Framework, London NW1 2ND
            [6 ]Public and Environmental Health Research Unit, Department of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT
            Author notes
            Correspondence to: P Craig peter@ 123456sphsu.mrc.ac.uk
            Contributors
            Role: programme manager
            Role: professor
            Role: director
            Role: professor
            Role: director
            Role: professor
            Journal
            BMJ
            bmj
            BMJ : British Medical Journal
            BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
            0959-8138
            1468-5833
            2008
            2008
            29 September 2008
            : 337
            2769032
            18824488
            crap570820
            10.1136/bmj.a1655
            © BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 2008
            Categories
            Research Methods and Reporting

            Medicine

            Comments

            Comment on this article