Literature DB >> 9120506

Are community health interventions evaluated appropriately? A review of six journals.

P J Smith1, M E Moffatt, S C Gelskey, S Hudson, K Kaita.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine if Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) methodology was used appropriately in community health, we: (1) determined the proportion of non-randomized studies that should have been RCTs, and (2) assessed the quality of the RCTs.
METHODS: The 1992 issues of six community health journals were manually searched. Intervention studies were analyzed. Studies that did not use randomization were analyzed for feasibility and practicality of RCT methods; RCTs were analyzed for quality using a checklist. RCTs were compared with community health RCTs from The New England Journal of Medicine. The proportion of studies meeting each criterion was determined.
RESULTS: Fourteen percent of 603 studies were interventions and 4% were RCTs. Of those not using randomization, 42% should have. Mean RCT scores were significantly lower for the community health journals than for The New England Journal of Medicine. Many criteria important to quality scored poorly.
CONCLUSIONS: RCTs are underused and lack methodologic rigor in community health. Conclusions regarding the effectiveness of interventions are therefore suspect.

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9120506     DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(96)00338-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  9 in total

Review 1.  Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions.

Authors:  L Rychetnik; M Frommer; P Hawe; A Shiell
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 3.710

2.  The quality of research in sports journals.

Authors:  C Bleakley; D MacAuley
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 13.800

Review 3.  Design and analysis of group-randomized trials: a review of recent practices.

Authors:  Sherri P Varnell; David M Murray; Jessica B Janega; Jonathan L Blitstein
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  In defense of the randomized controlled trial for health promotion research.

Authors:  Laura Rosen; Orly Manor; Dan Engelhard; David Zucker
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2006-05-30       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 5.  Pragmatic randomised controlled trials in parenting research: the issue of intention to treat.

Authors:  Karen Whittaker; Chris Sutton; Chris Burton
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 3.710

Review 6.  Internal and external validity of cluster randomised trials: systematic review of recent trials.

Authors:  Sandra Eldridge; Deborah Ashby; Catherine Bennett; Melanie Wakelin; Gene Feder
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-03-25

Review 7.  Which resources should be used to identify RCT/CCTs for systematic reviews: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ellen T Crumley; Natasha Wiebe; Kristie Cramer; Terry P Klassen; Lisa Hartling
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2005-08-10       Impact factor: 4.615

8.  Statistical analysis and handling of missing data in cluster randomised trials: protocol for a systematic review.

Authors:  Mallorie Fiero; Shuang Huang; Melanie L Bell
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2015-05-13       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  Analysis of group randomized trials with multiple binary endpoints and small number of groups.

Authors:  Ji-Hyun Lee; Michael J Schell; Richard Roetzheim
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-10-21       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.