Cited by 138Health Policy Implementation ScienceEvaluation and Performance AssessmentAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques

Developing and evaluating complex interventions: updating medical Research Council guidance to take account of new methodological and theoretical approaches

Open access
Skivington, Kathryn, Matthews, Lynsay, Craig, Peter, Simpson, Sharon, Moore, Laurence·2018·The Lancet

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0140-6736(18)32865-4

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Skivington, K., Matthews, L., Craig, P., Simpson, S., & Moore, L.
Affiliations
University of Glasgow (GB)
Corresponding author
Skivington, Kathryn
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-11
Volume
392
Pages
S2
ISSN
  • 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
  • 0140-6736
OpenAlex
W2900704124
Cited by
137
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 68 · 2019: 8
FWCI
37.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • MRC Strategic Award (MC_PC_13027)
  • CSO programme grants (MC_UU_12017/14, SPHSU14, MC_UU_12017/15, SPHSU15)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
Keywords
complex interventions, complex systems science, program theory, natural experiment, research prioritization, intervention development

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review