Case study research and causal inference

被引:9
作者
Green, Judith [1 ]
Hanckel, Benjamin [2 ]
Petticrew, Mark [3 ]
Paparini, Sara [4 ]
Shaw, Sara [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Exeter, Wellcome Ctr Cultures & Environm Hlth, Exeter, England
[2] Western Sydney Univ, Inst Culture & Soc, Sydney, Australia
[3] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Dept Publ Hlth Environm & Soc, London, England
[4] Queen Mary Univ London, Wolfson Inst Populat Hlth, London, England
[5] Univ Oxford, Nuffield Dept Primary Care Hlth Sci, Oxford, England
基金
英国惠康基金; 英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
Case study; Evaluation; Causal inference; Inequality; Public health; Health services research; QUALITATIVE COMPARATIVE-ANALYSIS; PUBLIC-HEALTH; INTERVENTIONS; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1186/s12874-022-01790-8
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Case study methodology is widely used in health research, but has had a marginal role in evaluative studies, given it is often assumed that case studies offer little for making causal inferences. We undertook a narrative review of examples of case study research from public health and health services evaluations, with a focus on interventions addressing health inequalities. We identified five types of contribution these case studies made to evidence for causal relationships. These contributions relate to: (1) evidence about system actors' own theories of causality; (2) demonstrative examples of causal relationships; (3) evidence about causal mechanisms; (4) evidence about the conditions under which causal mechanisms operate; and (5) inference about causality in complex systems. Case studies can and do contribute to understanding causal relationships. More transparency in the reporting of case studies would enhance their discoverability, and aid the development of a robust and pluralistic evidence base for public health and health services interventions. To strengthen the contribution that case studies make to that evidence base, researchers could: draw on wider methods from the political and social sciences, in particular on methods for robust analysis; carefully consider what population their case is a case 'of'; and explicate the rationale used for making causal inferences.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 47 条
[1]   RESEARCHING PUBLIC-HEALTH - BEHIND THE QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE METHODOLOGICAL DEBATE [J].
BAUM, F .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 1995, 40 (04) :459-468
[2]  
Beach Derek., 2019, Process-Tracing Methods, V2nd
[3]   Using Qualitative Comparative Analysis to understand complex policy problems [J].
Blackman, Tim ;
Wistow, Jonathan ;
Byrne, Dave .
EVALUATION, 2013, 19 (02) :126-140
[4]   Evaluating complex social interventions in a complex world [J].
Byrne, David .
EVALUATION, 2013, 19 (03) :217-228
[5]   Human resources for health and universal health coverage: fostering equity and effective coverage [J].
Campbell, James ;
Buchan, James ;
Cometto, Giorgio ;
David, Benedict ;
Dussault, Gilles ;
Fogstad, Helga ;
Fronteira, Ines ;
Lozano, Rafael ;
Nyonator, Frank ;
Pablos-Mendez, Ariel ;
Quain, Estelle E. ;
Starrs, Ann ;
Tangcharoensathien, Viroj .
BULLETIN OF THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION, 2013, 91 (11) :853-863
[6]   What evidence should guidelines take note of? [J].
Cartwright, Nancy .
JOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2018, 24 (05) :1139-1144
[7]   The Art of Medicine A philosopher's view of the long road from RCTs to effectiveness [J].
Cartwright, Nancy .
LANCET, 2011, 377 (9775) :1400-1401
[8]   The limitations of randomized controlled trials in predicting effectiveness [J].
Cartwright, Nancy ;
Munro, Eileen .
JOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2010, 16 (02) :260-266
[9]   Mechanisms and the Evidence Hierarchy [J].
Clarke, Brendan ;
Gillies, Donald ;
Illari, Phyllis ;
Russo, Federica ;
Williamson, Jon .
TOPOI-AN INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF PHILOSOPHY, 2014, 33 (02) :339-360
[10]  
Craig P., 2018, Taking account of context in population health intervention research: guidance for producers, users and funders of research, DOI [DOI 10.3310/CIHR-NIHR-01, https://doi.org/10.3310/CIHR-NIHR-01, 10.3310/CIHR-NIHR-01]