Integrating Process with Outcome Data in a Randomized Controlled Trial of Sex Education

Evaluation

Volumn 12, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 330-352

  Strange, Vicki ^a   Allen, Elizabeth ^b   Oakley, Ann ^a   Bonell, Chris ^c   Johnson, Anne ^b   Stephenson, Judith ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b ROYAL FREE AND UNIVERSITY COLLEGE MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^c LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

evaluation methods; peer education; process evaluation; randomized controlled trial; sex education

Indexed keywords

EID: 33750685594     PISSN: 13563890     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1356389006069138     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Bloom, H. (1984) ‘Accounting for No-Shows in Experimental Evaluation Designs’, Evaluation Review 8(2): 225-246.
2. Bonell, C., V. Strange, J. Stephenson, S. Forrest, A. Copas, A. Oakley, A. Johnson and S. Black (2003) ‘The Effect of Various Dimensions of Social Exclusion on Young People's Risk of Teenage Pregnancy: Development of Hypotheses from Analysis of Baseline Data Arising from a Randomized Trial of Sex Education’, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 57: 871-876.
3. Campbell, M., R. Fitzpatrick, A. Haines, A. L. Kinmonth, P. Sandercock, D. Spiegelhalter and P. Tyrer (2000) ‘Framework for Design and Evaluation of Complex Interventions to Improve Health’, British Medical Journal 321: 694-696.
4. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) (1990) Treatment of Early Breast Cancer, vol. 1, Worldwide Evidence 1985-1990. New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Forrest, S., V. Strange, A. Oakley and the RIPPLE Study Team (2002) ‘A Comparison of Students’ Evaluations of a Peer-Delivered Sex Education Programme and Teacher-Led Provision’, Sex Education 2(3): 195-214.
6. Gueron, J. M. (2002) ‘The Politics of Random Assignment: Implementing Studies and Affecting Policy’, in F. Mosteller and R. Boruch (eds) Evidence Matters: Randomized Trials in Education Research, pp. 15-49. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
7. Hollister, R. G., P. Kemper and J. Wooldridge (1979) ‘Linking Process and Impact Analysis: The Case of Supported Work’, in T. D. Cook and C. S. Reichardt (eds) Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Evaluation Research, pp. 140-149. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
8. Liang, K. Y. and S. L. Zeger (1986) ‘Longitudinal Data Analysis Using Generalized Linear Models’, Biometrika 73(1): 13-22.
9. McGraw, S. A., S. M. McKinlay, L. McClements, T. M. Lasater, A. Assaf and R. A. Carleton (1989) ‘Methods in Program Evaluation: The Process Evaluation System of the Pawtucket Heart Health Program’, Evaluation Review 13(5): 459-483.
10. Oakley, A. (1992) Social Support and Motherhood: The Natural History of a Research Project. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
11. Oakley, A. (2000) Experiments in Knowing: Gender and Method in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Polity Press.
12. Oakley, A., V. Strange, J. Stephenson, S. Forrest, H. Monteiro and the RIPPLE Study Team (2004) ‘Evaluating Processes: A Case Study of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Sex Education’, Evaluation 10(4): 440-462.
13. Oxman, A. D., H. Gordon and A. Guyatt (1992) ‘Consumer's Guide to Subgroup Analyses’, Annals of Internal Medicine 116: 78-84.
14. Patton, M. Q. (1989) ‘A Context and Boundaries for a Theory-Driven Approach to Validity’, Evaluation and Program Planning 4: 375-377.
15. Pawson, R. and N. Tilley (1997) Realistic Evaluation. London: SAGE.
16. Pawson, R., T. Greenhalgh, G. Harvey and K. Walshe (2004) Realist Synthesis: An Introduction. ESRC Research Methods Programme, RMP Methods Paper 2/2004. Manchester: University of Manchester.
17. Pocock, S. J. and M. Abdalla (1998) ‘The Hope and Hazards of Using Compliance Data in Randomized Controlled Trials’, Statistics in Medicine 17: 303-317.
18. Pocock, S. J., M. D. Hughes and R. J. Lee (1987) ‘Statistical Problems in the Reporting of Clinical Trials: A Survey of Three Medical Journals’, New England Journal of Medicine 317: 426-432.
19. Rossi, P. H., M. W. Lipsey and H. E. Freeman (2004) Evaluation: A Systematic Approach, 7th edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
20. Sommer, A. and S. Zeger (1991) ‘On Estimating Efficacy from Clinical Trials’, Statistics in Medicine 10: 45-52.
21. Stame, N. (2004) ‘Theory-Based Evaluation and Varieties of Complexity’, Evaluation 10(1): 58-76.
22. Stephenson, J. M., A. Oakley, A. M. Johnson, S. Forrest, V. Strange, S. Charleston, S. Black, A. Copas, A. Petruckevitch and A. Babiker (2003) ‘A School-Based Randomized Controlled Trial of Peer-Led Sex Education in England’, Controlled Clinical Trials 24: 643-657.
23. Stephenson, J. M., V. Strange, S. Forrest, A. Oakley, A. Copas, E. Allen, A. Babiker, S. Black, M. Ali, H. Monteiro and A. M. Johnson (2004) ‘A Randomized Intervention Trial of PuPil-Led Sex Education in England (RIPPLE)’, The Lancet 36: 338-346.
24. Strange, V., S. Forrest, A. Oakley and the RIPPLE Study Team (2002) ‘What Influences Peer-led Sex Education in the Classroom? A View from the Peer Educators’, Health Education Research: Theory and Practice 17(3): 327-338.
25. Tones, K. and S. Tilford (1994) Health Education: Effectiveness, Efficiency and Equity. London: Chapman Hall.
26. Victora, C. G., S. R. Huttly, S. C. Fuchs and M. T. A. Olinto (1997) ‘The Role of Conceptual Frameworks in Epidemiological Analysis: A Hierarchical Approach’, International Journal of Epidemiology 26(1): 224-227.
27. Wiggins, M., A. Oakley, I. Roberts, H. Turner, L. Rajan, H. Austerberry, R. Mujica and M. Mugford (2004) ‘The Social Support and Family Health Study: A Randomised Controlled Trial and Economic Evaluation of Two Alternative Forms of Postnatal Support for Mothers Living in Disadvantaged Inner City Areas’, Health Technology Assessment Monograph 8(32).
28. Wight, D. and A. Obasi (2003) ‘Unpacking the Black Box: The Importance of Process Data to Explain Outcomes’, in J. M. Stephenson, J. Imrie and C. Bonell (eds) Effective Sexual Health Interventions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
29. Yeaton, W. H. (1985) ‘Using Measures of Treatment Strength and Integrity in Planning Research’, in D. A. Cordray (ed.) Utilizing Prior Research in Evaluation Planning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
30. Yusuf, S., R. Collins and R. Peto (1984) ‘Why Do We Need Some Large, Simple, Randomized Trials?’, Statistics in Medicine 3: 409-420.