Evidence into practice, experimentation and quasi experimentation: Are the methods up to the task?

Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health

Volumn 52, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 75-81

  Freemantle, N ^a   Wood, J ^a   Crawford, F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; EXPERIMENTATION; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH PRACTITIONER; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE;

EID: 0031962893     PISSN: 0143005X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jech.52.2.75     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. The SOLVD investigators. Effect of enalapril on survival in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fractions and congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med 1991;325:293-302.
2. Garg R, Yusuf S. Overview of randomized trials of angiotesin-converting enzyme inhibitors on mortality and morbidity in patients with heart failure. Collaborative Group on ACE Inhibitors Trials. JAMA 1995;273:1450-6.
3. Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaborative Group. Collaborative overview of randomised controlled trials of antiplatelet therapy - I: Prevention of death, myocardial infarction and stroke by prolonged antiplatelet therapy in various categories of patients. BMJ 1994;308:81-106.
4. Juul-Möller S, Edvardsson N, Jahnmatz B, Rosén A, Sørensen S, Ômblus R for the Swedish Angina Pectoris Aspirin Trial (SAPAT) Group. Double-blind trial of aspirin in primary prevention of myocardial infarction in patients with stable chronic angina pectoris. Lancet 1992;340:1421-5.
5. ISIS-2 (Second International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative Group. Randomised trial of intravenous streptokinase, oral aspirin, both or nether among 17187 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction: ISIS-2. Lancet 1988;ii:349-60.
6. Fibrinolytic Therapy Trialists' Collaborative Group. Indications for fibrinolytic therapy in suspected acute myocardial infarction: Collaborative overview of early mortality and major morbidity results from all randomised trials of more than 1000 patients. Lancet 1994;343:311-22.
7. Antman EM, Lau J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC. A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. JAMA 1992;268:240-8.
8. Effective Health Care. Implementing clinical practice guidelines. Bulletin no 8. Leeds: University of Leeds, 1994.
9. Freemantle N, Harvey E, Grimshaw J, et al. The effectiveness of printed educational materials in changing the behaviour of healthcare professionals. In: Freemantle N, Bero L, Grilli R, Grimshaw J, Oxman A, eds. Effective Professional Practice Module. In: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 1996:issue 3.
10. Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press, 1983.
11. Eddy DM. A manual for assessing health practices and designing practice policies: the explicit approach. Philadelphia: American College of Physicians, 1992.
12. Peckham M. Research and development for the National Health Service. Lancet 1991;338:367-71
13. Department of Health. Methods to promote the implementation of research findings in the NHS - priorities for evaluation. Report to the NHS Central Research and Development Committee. Leeds: Department of Health, 1995.
14. Evans CE, Haynes RB, Gilbert JR, Taylor DW, Sackett DL, Johnston M. Educational package on hypertension for primary care physicians. Can Med Assoc J. 1984;130:719-22.
15. Evans CE, Haynes RB, Birkett NJ, et al. Does a mailed continuing program improve physician performance? results of a randomized trial in antihypertensive care. JAMA 1986;255:501-4.
16. Covell DG, Uman GC, Manning PR. Information needs in office practice: are they being met? Ann Intern Med 1985;103:596-9.
17. Pocock SJ. Clinical trials, a practical approach. Chichester: Wiley, 1983.
18. Soumerai SB, Avorn J. Principles of educational outreach ("academic detailing") to improve clinical decision making. JAMA 1990;263:549-56.
19. Cochrane Collaboration on Effective Professional Practice (CCEPP) Register of Studies. York: University of York, 1996.
20. Schwartz D, Lellouch J. Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutic trials. Journal of Chronic Diseases 1967;20:637-48.
21. Cook TD, Campbell DT. Quasi-experimentation: design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1979.
22. ISIS-4: A randomised factorial trial assessing early oral captopril, oral mononitrate and intravenous magnesium sulphate in 58 050 patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction. ISIS 4 (Fourth International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative Group. Lancet 1995;345: 669-85.
23. Lomas J, Enkin M, Anderson GM, Hannah WJ, Vayda E, Singer J. Opinion leaders vs audit and feedback to implement practice guidelines. Delivery after previous cesarean section. JAMA 1991;265:2202-7
24. Norton PG, Dempsey LJ. Self-audit: Its effect on quality of care. J Fam Pract 1985;21:289-91.
25. Stross JK, Bole GG. Evaluation of an educational program for primary care practitioners on the management of osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1985;28:108-11.
26. Cornfield J. Randomization by group: a formal analysis. Am J Epidemiol 1978;108:100-2.
27. Wagner EH, Barrett P, Barry MJ, Barlow W, Fowler FJ. The effect of a shared decision-making program on rates of surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Med Care 1995;33: 765-70.
28. Angell M. Patients' preferences in randomized clinical trials. N Engl J Med 1984;310:1385-7.
29. Domenighetti G, Luraschi P, Casabianca A, et al Effect of information campaign by the mass media on hysterectomy rates. Lancet 1988;ii:1470-3.
30. Wallack L, Dorfman L, Jernigan D, Themba M. Media advocacy and public health. Power for prevention. London: Sage, 1993.
31. Begg CB, Berlin JA. Publication bias: a problem in interpreting medical data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 1988;151:419-63.
32. Mosteller F, Colditz GA. Understanding research synthesis (meta-analysis). Annu Rev Public Health 1996;17:1-23.
33. Cappelleri JC, Loannidis JPA, Schmid CH, et al. Large trials vs meta analysis of smaller trials: how do they compare? JAMA 1996;276:1332-8.
34. Heinsman DT, Shadish WR. Assignment methods in experimentation: when do nonranomized experiments approximate answers from randomized experiments? Psychological Methods 1996;1:154-69.
35. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1986;7:177-88.
36. Davis DA, Thomson MA, Oxman AD, Haynes B. Evidence for the effectiveness of CME. JAMA 1992;268:1111-17.
37. Van de Werf F, Topol EJ, Lee KL, et al. Variations in patient management and outcomes for acute myocardial infarction in the United States and other countries: Results from the GUSTO trial. JAMA 1995;273:1586-91.