Cited by 586Health Policy Implementation ScienceEvaluation and Performance AssessmentHealthcare Quality and Management

Research designs for studies evaluating the effectiveness of change and improvement strategies

Open access
Eccles, M·2003·Quality and Safety in Health Care

Abstract

The methods of evaluating change and improvement strategies are not well described. The design and conduct of a range of experimental and non-experimental quantitative designs are considered. Such study designs should usually be used in a context where they build on appropriate theoretical, qualitative and modelling work, particularly in the development of appropriate interventions. A range of experimental designs are discussed including single and multiple arm randomised controlled trials and the use of more complex factorial and block designs. The impact of randomisation at both group and individual levels and three non-experimental designs (uncontrolled before and after, controlled before and after, and time series analysis) are also considered. The design chosen will reflect both the needs (and resources) in any particular circumstances and also the purpose of the evaluation. The general principle underlying the choice of evaluative design is, however, simple-those conducting such evaluations should use the most robust design possible to minimise bias and maximise generalisability.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/qhc.12.1.47

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The interventions may have been poorly developed, lacking appropriate theoretical basis and subsequent components to impact on the measured outcome domains.

    “The interventions may have been poorly developed, lacking appropriate theoretical basis and subsequent components to impact on the measured outcome domains [82,83].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Murray DM. The design and analysis of group randomised trials. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
  2. Cochran WG, Cox GM. Experimental design. New York: Wiley, 1957.
  3. Eccles M, McColl E, Steen N, et al. A cluster randomised controlled trial of computerised evidence based guidelines for angina and asthma in primary care. BMJ 2002;325:941-7.
  4. Matowe L, Ramsay C, Grimshaw JM, et al. Influence of the Royal College of Radiologists' guidelines on referrals from general practice: a time series analysis. Clin Radiol 2002;57:575-8.
  5. Grilli R, Ramsay CR, Minozi S. Mass media interventions: effects on health services utilisation In: Cochrane Collaboration. The Cochrane Library. Oxford: Update Software, 2002.
  6. Grilli R, Freemantle N, Minozzi S, et al. Impact of mass media on health services utilisation. In: Cochrane Collaboration. The Cochrane Library. Issue 3. Oxford: Update Software, 1998.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Eccles, M.
Affiliations
Newcastle University (GB)
Corresponding author
Eccles, M
Venue
Quality and Safety in Health Care
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2003-02-01
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
47-52
ISSN
  • 1475-3898 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-3901
OpenAlex
W2046947214
Cited by
586
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 40 · 2016: 35 · 2015: 44 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 23
FWCI
35.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • BMJ Quality & Safety (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Newcastle University
  • University of Aberdeen
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
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
Keywords
research design, improvement measures, randomized controlled trials, factorial design, block designs, before-after study, time series analysis, bias, generalizability, intervention development
MeSH terms
United Kingdom, Health Services Research, Humans, Organizational Innovation, Research Design, State Medicine, Reproducibility of Results, Program Evaluation, Cluster Analysis, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Total Quality Management

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