The Purchase of Contraceptives by College Students
In: Family relations, Band 29, Heft 3, S. 358
ISSN: 1741-3729
9 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Family relations, Band 29, Heft 3, S. 358
ISSN: 1741-3729
In: The Journal of sex research, Band 47, Heft 2-3, S. 137-152
ISSN: 1559-8519
In: Reproductive Health Matters, Vol. 22, No. 43, May 2014, pp 53-64
SSRN
In: The Journal of sex research, Band 19, Heft 2, S. 137-159
ISSN: 1559-8519
In: Evaluation: the international journal of theory, research and practice, Band 10, Heft 4, S. 440-462
ISSN: 1461-7153
This article explores the rationales offered in the evaluation literature for studying the processes involved in programme implementation, and their relationship with current arguments about the use of experimental designs to evaluate social interventions. It describes, as a case study, a process evaluation carried out as an integral part of a randomized controlled trial of peer-led sex education. The process evaluation was designed to answer important questions about the implementation of the intervention, the social context of the trial, and the experiences of trial participants. The article describes the methods used to collect process data, and some of the challenges involved. It concludes by arguing that process evaluation is necessarily complex, but essential to the task of understanding why and how interventions and outcomes may be related.
In: The annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Band 589, Heft 1, S. 170-189
ISSN: 1552-3349
Although widely accepted in medicine and health services research, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are often viewed with hostility by social scientists, who cite a variety of reasons as to why this approach to evaluation cannot be used to research social interventions. This article discusses the three central themes in these debates, which are those of science, ethics, and feasibility. The article uses three recent U.K. trials of social interventions (day care for preschool children, social support for disadvantaged families, and peer-led sex education for young people) to consider issues relating to the use of random allocation for social intervention evaluation and to suggest some practical strategies for the successful implementation of "social" RCTs. The article argues that the criteria of science, ethics, and feasibility can and should apply to social intervention trials in just the same way as they do to clinical trials.
In: The annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Band 589, S. 170-189
ISSN: 1552-3349
Although widely accepted in medicine & health vices research, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are often viewed with hostility by social scientists, who cite a variety of reasons as to why this approach to evaluation cannot be used to research social interventions. This article discusses the three central themes in these debates, which are those of science, ethics, & feasibility. The article uses three recent U.K. trials of social interventions (day care for preschool children, social support for disadvantaged families, & peer-led sex education for young people) to consider issues relating to the use of random allocation for social intervention evaluation & to suggest some practical strategies for the successful implementation of "social" RCTs. The article argues that the criteria of science, ethics, & feasibility can & should apply to social intervention trials in just the same way as they do to clinical trials. [Copyright 2003 Sage Publications, Inc.]
In: Evaluation: the international journal of theory, research and practice, Band 12, Heft 3, S. 330-352
ISSN: 1461-7153
Integration of process with outcome evaluations has been recommended as a way of addressing some of the criticisms of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) for evaluating social interventions. This is the second of two articles (the first was published in issue 10(4) of this journal) discussing the design, implementation and analysis of a process evaluation as an integral part of the RIPPLE (Randomized Intervention of Pupil Peer-Led sex Education) Study. The methods for integrating process and outcome data are outlined and findings are presented to illustrate how integration of process and outcome data enabled exploration of: 1) variation between schools in the extent and quality of the intervention implemented, and any impact of this on outcomes; 2) the processes by which the intervention might affect outcomes; and 3) the extent to which different subgroups of students or schools may have responded differently to the intervention. The article concludes with a discussion of the methodological issues arising from this attempt at integrating process and outcome evaluations within the design of an RCT.
In: Reproductive biomedicine & society online, Band 4, S. 18-20
ISSN: 2405-6618