Guidelines for reporting evaluations based on observational methodology

被引:74
作者
Portell, Mariona [1 ]
Teresa Anguera, M. [2 ]
Chacon-Moscoso, Salvador [3 ,4 ]
Sanduvete-Chaves, Susana [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Autonoma Barcelona, E-08193 Barcelona, Spain
[2] Univ Barcelona, E-08007 Barcelona, Spain
[3] Univ Seville, Seville, Spain
[4] Univ Autonoma Chile, Santiago, Chile
关键词
Program evaluation; observational methodology; designs; low intervention; reporting guidelines; COMPLEX INTERVENTIONS; BEHAVIOR; IMPLEMENTATION; FIDELITY; CRITERIA; TIME;
D O I
10.7334/psicothema2014.276
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Background: Observational methodology is one of the most suitable research designs for evaluating fidelity of implementation, especially in complex interventions. However, the conduct and reporting of observational studies is hampered by the absence of specific guidelines, such as those that exist for other evaluation designs. This lack of specific guidance poses a threat to the quality and transparency of these studies and also constitutes a considerable publication hurdle. The aim of this study thus was to draw up a set of proposed guidelines for reporting evaluations based on observational methodology. Method: The guidelines were developed by triangulating three sources of information: observational studies performed in different fields by experts in observational methodology, reporting guidelines for general studies and studies with similar designs to observational studies, and proposals from experts in observational methodology at scientific meetings. Results: We produced a list of guidelines grouped into three domains: intervention and expected outcomes, methods, and results. Conclusions: The result is a useful, carefully crafted set of simple guidelines for conducting and reporting observational studies in the field of program evaluation.
引用
收藏
页码:283 / 289
页数:7
相关论文
共 59 条
  • [41] Moher D, 2010, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V340, DOI [10.1136/bmj.c869, 10.1186/1741-7015-8-18, 10.1136/bmj.c332, 10.4103/0976-500X.72352, 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.005, 10.1016/j.ijsu.2011.09.004]
  • [42] Measuring People Intensively
    Moskowitz, D. S.
    Russell, Jennifer J.
    Sadikaj, Gentiana
    Sutton, Rachel
    [J]. CANADIAN PSYCHOLOGY-PSYCHOLOGIE CANADIENNE, 2009, 50 (03): : 131 - 140
  • [43] Back to social behavior: Mining the mundane
    Patterson, Miles L.
    [J]. BASIC AND APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2008, 30 (02) : 93 - 101
  • [44] Pawson Ray, 2005, J Health Serv Res Policy, V10 Suppl 1, P21, DOI 10.1258/1355819054308530
  • [45] Tejera FP, 2011, PSICOTHEMA, V23, P858
  • [46] A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in Mixed Studies Reviews
    Pluye, Pierre
    Gagnon, Marie-Pierre
    Griffiths, Frances
    Johnson-Lafleur, Janique
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NURSING STUDIES, 2009, 46 (04) : 529 - 546
  • [47] Riberas G, 2000, PSICOTHEMA, V12, P470
  • [48] Sequential analysis of an interactive peer support group
    Roustan, Marina
    Izquierdo Rodriguez, Conrad
    Teresa Anguera Argilaga, M.
    [J]. PSICOTHEMA, 2013, 25 (03) : 396 - 401
  • [49] What Kind of Empirical Research Should We Publish, Fund, and Reward?
    Rozin, Paul
    [J]. PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2009, 4 (04) : 435 - 439
  • [50] Sackett G.P., 1980, EXCEPT INFANT, V4, P300