Evaluation study design – a pluralist approach to evidence

References

• Altman, D. G. 1985. “Comparability of Randomised Groups.” The Statistician 34: 125–136. doi: 10.2307/2987510
   Google Scholar
• Altman, D. G. 1991. “Randomization: Essential for Reducing Bias.” British Medical Journal 302 (6791): 1481–1482. doi: 10.1136/bmj.302.6791.1481
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altman, D. G., D. Moher, K. F. Schulz, M. Egger, F. Davidoff, D. Elbourne, P. Gotsche, and T. Lang. 2001. “The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration.” Annals of Internal Medicine 134 (8): 657–662. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-134-8-200104170-00012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American Evaluation Association (AEA). 2003. American Evaluation Association Response to U. S. Department of Education. Accessed June 2014. http://www.eval.org/p/cm/ld/fid=95.
   Google Scholar
• APA Presidential Taskforce on Evidence-Based Practice. 2006. “Evidence-based Practice in Psychology.” American Psychologist 61 (4): 271–285. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.61.4.271
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Assmann, S. F., S. J. Pocock, L. E. Enos, and L. E. Kasten. 2000. “Subgroup Analysis and Other (mis)Uses of Baseline Data in Clinical Trials.” The Lancet 355 (9235): 1064–1069. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02039-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Axford, N., L. Morpeth, M. Little, and V. Berry. 2008. “Linking Prevention Science and Community Engagement: A Case Study of the Ireland Disadvantaged Children and Youth Programme.” Journal of Children’s Services 3 (2): 40–54. doi: 10.1108/17466660200800011
   Google Scholar
• Barkham, M., and J. Mellor-Clark. 2003. “Bridging Evidence-based Practice and Practice-based Evidence: Developing a Rigorous and Relevant Knowledge for the Psychological Therapies.” Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy 10 (6): 319–327. doi: 10.1002/cpp.379
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beauchamp, T. L., and J. F. Childress. 2009. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 6th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Boruch, R., D. Weisburd, H. M. Turner III, A. Karpyn, and J. Littell. 2009. “Randomized Controlled Trials for Evaluation and Planning.” In The Sage Handbook of Applied Social Research, edited by L. Bickman and D. J. Rog, 2nd ed., 147–181. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Brooks, G. 2002. What Works for Children with Literacy Difficulties? The Effectiveness of Intervention Schemes. London: Department for Education and Skills. Accessed March 2010. http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR380.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Canavan, J., L. Coen, P. Dolan, and L. White. 2009. “Privileging Practice: Facing the Challenges of Integrated Working for Outcomes for Children.” Children & Society 23 (5): 377–388. doi: 10.1111/j.1099-0860.2009.00230.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheetham, J., R. Fuller, G. McIvor, and A. Perth. 1992. Evaluating Social Work Effectiveness. Buckingham: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, H. T. 2004. “The Roots of Theory-driven Evaluation, Current Views and Origins.” In Evaluation Roots, Tracing Theorists’ Views and Influences, edited by M. Alkin, 133–152. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W., and V. L. P. Clark. 2007. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Devaney, C. 2011. Family Support as an Approach to Working with Children and Families. An Explorative Study of Past and Present Perspectives among Pioneers and Practitioners. Saarbrücken: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Dolan, P. 2006. “Assessment, Intervention and Self Appraisal Tools for Family Support.” In Family Support as Reflective Practice, edited by P. Dolan, J. Pinkerton, and J. Canavan, 196–213. London and Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Fives, A. 2016. “Modeling the Interaction of Academic Self-beliefs, Frequency of Reading at Home, Emotional Support, and Reading Achievement: An RCT Study of at-Risk Early Readers in 1st Grade and 2nd Grade.” Reading Psychology 13 (3): 339–370. doi: 10.1080/02702711.2015.1055870
   Google Scholar
• Fives, A., D. Russell, N. Kearns, R. Lyons, P. Eaton, J. Canavan, and C. Devaney. 2015. “The Ethics of Randomized Controlled Trials in Social Settings: Can Social Trials be Scientifically Promising and must there be Equipoise?” International Journal of Research & Method in Education 38 (1): 56–71. doi: 10.1080/1743727X.2014.908338
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fives, A., D. Russell, N. Kearns, R. Lyons, P. Eaton, J. Canavan, C. Devaney, and A. O’Brien. 2013. “The Role of Random Allocation in Randomized Controlled Trials: Distinguishing Selection Bias From Baseline Imbalance.” Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation 9 (20): 33–42.
   Google Scholar
• Freedman, B. 1987. “Equipoise and the Ethics of Clinical Research.” New England Journal of Medicine 317 (3): 141–145. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198707163170304
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghate, D. 2001. “Community-based Evaluations in the UK: Scientific Concerns and Practical Constraints.” Children and Society 15 (1): 23–32. doi: 10.1111/j.1099-0860.2001.tb00200.x
   Google Scholar
• Government Social Research Unit. 2007. Magenta Book Background Papers. Paper 7: Why do Social Experiments? London: HM Treasury. Accessed January 2011. http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/Assets/chap_6_magenta_tcm6-8609.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group. 2004. “Grading Quality of Evidence and Strength of Recommendations.” British Medical Journal 328 (7454): 1490–1494. doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7454.1490
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, L. 2001. “From Research to “Best Practices” in Other Settings and Populations.” American Journal of Health Behavior 25 (3): 165–178. doi: 10.5993/AJHB.25.3.2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greene, L. W., and M. W. Kreuter. 1991. Health Promotion Planning: An Educational and Environmental Approach. Toronto: Mayfield Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Hammersley, M. 2008. “Paradigm War Revived? On the Diagnosis of Resistance to Randomized Controlled Trials and Systematic Review in Education.” International Journal of Research and Method in Education 31 (1): 3–10. doi: 10.1080/17437270801919826
   Google Scholar
• IES (Institute of Education Sciences). 2008. What Works Clearinghouse. Procedures and Standards Handbook. Version 2.1. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/documentsum.aspx?sid=19.
   Google Scholar
• Institute of Medicine. 2001. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jack, G. 2011. “Early Intervention – Smart Practice.” Every Child Journal 2 (3): 50–53.
   Google Scholar
• Jaded, A. 1998. Randomised Controlled Trials: A User’s Guide. London: BMJ Books.
   Google Scholar
• Joffe, S., and F. G. Miller. 2008. “Bench to Bedside: Mapping the Moral Terrain of Clinical Research.” Hastings Center Report 38 (2): 30–42. doi: 10.1353/hcr.2008.0019
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Juni, P., D. G. Altman, and M. Egger. 2001. “Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Assessing the Quality of Controlled Clinical Trials.” British Medical Journal 323 (7303): 42–46. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7303.42
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazzari, A. 2014. “Early Childhood Education and Care in Times of Crisis.” European Early Childhood Education Research Journal 22 (4): 427–431, doi:10.1080/1350293X.2014.947829
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, F. G., and H. Brody. 2007. “Clinical Equipoise and the Incoherence of Research Ethics.” Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 32 (2): 151–165. doi: 10.1080/03605310701255750
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, P. B., and C. Weijer. 2006. “Fiduciary Obligation in Clinical Research.” Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 34 (2): 424–440. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2006.00049.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell, P. F. 2011. “Evidence-based Practice in Real-world Services for Young People with Complex Needs: New Opportunities Suggested by Recent Implementation Science.” Children and Youth Services Review 33 (2): 207–21. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrison, K. 2001. “Randomised Controlled Trials for Evidence-Based Education: Some Problems in Judging “What Works”.” Evaluation and Research in Education 15 (2): 69–83. doi: 10.1080/09500790108666984
   Google Scholar
• Muir Gray, J. A. 1996. Evidence-based Healthcare. London: Churchill Livingstone.
   Google Scholar
• NESF (National Economic and Social Forum). 2005. Early Childhood Care and Education, Report 31, Dublin: NESF.
   Google Scholar
• NICE (National Institute for Clinical Excellence). 2005. Guideline Development Methods: Information for National Collaborating Centres and Guideline Developers. London: NICE.
   Google Scholar
• Nutley, S., A. Powell, and H. Davies. 2013. What Counts as Good Evidence: Provocation Paper for the Alliance for Useful Evidence. London: Alliance for Useful Evidence.
   Google Scholar
• Oakley, A., V. Strange, T. Toroyan, M. Wiggins, I. Roberts, and J. Stephenson. 2003. “Using Random Allocation to Evaluate Social Interventions: Three Recent U.K. Examples.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 589 (1): 170–189. doi: 10.1177/0002716203254765
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pawson, R., and N. Tilley. 1997. Realistic Evaluation. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Petticrew, M., and H. Robert. 2003. “Evidence, Hierarchies, and Typologies: Horses for Courses.” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 57 (7): 527–529. doi: 10.1136/jech.57.7.527
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puttick, R., and J. Ludlow. 2013. Standards of Evidence: An Approach that Balances the Need for Evidence with Innovation. London: NESTA.
   Google Scholar
• Ritter, G., and M. Holley. 2008. “Lessons for Conducting Random Assignment in Schools.” Journal of Children’s Services 3 (2): 28–39. doi: 10.1108/17466660200800010
   Google Scholar
• Rossi, P. H., M. W. Lipsey, and H. E. Freeman. 2004. Evaluation: A Systematic Approach. 7th ed. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Rubin, A., and E. R. Babbie. 2014. Research Methods for Social Work. Brooks Cole Empowerment Series, 8th ed. Belmont, CA: Library of Congress Publication.
   Google Scholar
• Sackett, D. L., W. M. Rosenberg, J. A. Gray, R. B. Haynes, and W. S. Richardson. 1996. “Evidence-based Medicine: What it is and What it isn’t.” British Medical Journal 312 (7023): 71–72. doi: 10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savage, R., S. Carless, and M. Stuart. 2003. “The Effects of Rime- and Phoneme-Based Teaching Delivered by Learning Support Assistants.” Journal of Research in Reading 26 (3): 211–233. doi: 10.1111/1467-9817.00199
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Senn, S. J. 1994. “Testing for Baseline Balance in Clinical Trials.” Statistics in Medicine 13 (17): 1715–1726. doi: 10.1002/sim.4780131703
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shadish, W. R., T. D. Cook, and D. T. Campbell. 2002. Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Generalised Causal Inferences. Boston, USA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
   Google Scholar
• Society for Prevention Research [SPR]. 2004. Standards of Evidence: Criteria for efficacy, effectiveness and dissemination. http://www.preventionresearch.org/StandardsofEvidencebook.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Speller, V., A. Learmonth, and D. Harrison. 1997. “The Search for Evidence of Effective Health Promotion.” British Medical Journal 315 (7104): 361–363. doi: 10.1136/bmj.315.7104.361
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart-Brown, S., R. Anthony, L. Wilson, S. Winstanley, N. Stallard, H. Snooks, and D. Simkiss. 2011. “Should Randomised Controlled Trials be the “Gold Standard” for Research on Preventive Interventions for Children?” Journal of Children’s Services 6 (4): 228–235. doi: 10.1108/17466661111190929
   Google Scholar
• Tierney, J. P., J. B. Grossman, and N. L. Resch. 1995. Making a Difference: An Impact Study of Big Brothers Big Sisters. Philadelphia: Public/Private Ventures. http://www.ppv.org/ppv/publication.asp?search_id=7&publication_id=111&section_id=0
   Google Scholar
• Urban, J. B., M. Hargreaves, and W. M. Trochim. 2014. “Evolutionary Evaluation: Implications for Evaluators, Researchers, Practitioners, Funders and the Evidence-based Programme Mandate.” Evaluation and Programme Planning 45: 127–139. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2014.03.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vance, M., and J. Clegg. 2012. “Use of Single Case Study Research in Child Speech, Language and Communication Interventions.” Child Language Teaching and Therapy 28 (3): 255–258. doi: 10.1177/0265659012457766
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vandenbroeck, M., G. Roets, and R. Roose. 2012. “Why the Evidence-Based Paradigm in Early Childhood Education and Care is Anything but Evident.” European Early Childhood Education Research Journal 20 (4): 537–552. doi: 10.1080/1350293X.2012.737238
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veatch, R. M. 2007. “The Irrelevance of Equipoise.” Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 32 (2): 167–83. doi: 10.1080/03605310701255776
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veerman, J. W., and T. A. van Yperen. 2007. “Degrees of Freedom and Degrees of Certainty: A Developmental Model for the Establishment of Evidence-based Youth Care.” Evaluation and Programmeme Planning 30: 212–221. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2007.01.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wandersman, A. 2003. “Community Science: Bridging the Gap Between Science and Practice With Community-Centered Models.” American Journal of Community Psychology 31 (3/4): 227–242. doi: 10.1023/A:1023954503247
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb, E. J., D. T. Campbell, R. D. Schwartz, L. Sechrest, and J. B. Grove. 1981. Nonreactive Measures in the Social Sciences. 2nd ed. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Wight, D., and A. Obasi. 2003. “Unpacking the “Black Box’: The Importance of Process Data to Explain Outcomes.” In Effective Sexual Health Interventions: Issues in Experimental Evaluation, edited by J. M. Stephenson, J. Imrie, and C. Bonell, 151–169. New York: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar