%0 Journal Article %1 Handley2018 %A Handley, Margaret A %A Lyles, Courtney R %A McCulloch, Charles %A Cattamanchi, Adithya %D 2018 %J Annual review of public health %K externalvalidity implementationscience interruptedtimeseries prepost quasi-experimentaldesign steppedwedge %N 1 %P 5-25 %R 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040617-014128 %T Selecting and Improving Quasi-Experimental Designs in Effectiveness and Implementation Research. %U http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040617-014128 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29328873 %V 39 %X Interventional researchers face many design challenges when assessing intervention implementation in real-world settings. Intervention implementation requires holding fast on internal validity needs while incorporating external validity considerations (such as uptake by diverse subpopulations, acceptability, cost, and sustainability). Quasi-experimental designs (QEDs) are increasingly employed to achieve a balance between internal and external validity. Although these designs are often referred to and summarized in terms of logistical benefits, there is still uncertainty about (a) selecting from among various QEDs and (b) developing strategies to strengthen the internal and external validity of QEDs. We focus here on commonly used QEDs (prepost designs with nonequivalent control groups, interrupted time series, and stepped-wedge designs) and discuss several variants that maximize internal and external validity at the design, execution and implementation, and analysis stages.

@article{Handley2018, abstract = {Interventional researchers face many design challenges when assessing intervention implementation in real-world settings. Intervention implementation requires holding fast on internal validity needs while incorporating external validity considerations (such as uptake by diverse subpopulations, acceptability, cost, and sustainability). Quasi-experimental designs (QEDs) are increasingly employed to achieve a balance between internal and external validity. Although these designs are often referred to and summarized in terms of logistical benefits, there is still uncertainty about (a) selecting from among various QEDs and (b) developing strategies to strengthen the internal and external validity of QEDs. We focus here on commonly used QEDs (prepost designs with nonequivalent control groups, interrupted time series, and stepped-wedge designs) and discuss several variants that maximize internal and external validity at the design, execution and implementation, and analysis stages.}, added-at = {2023-02-03T11:44:35.000+0100}, author = {Handley, Margaret A and Lyles, Courtney R and McCulloch, Charles and Cattamanchi, Adithya}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/23788fdf407fa86d8cd9cc56f2b0d8c0e/jepcastel}, doi = {10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040617-014128}, interhash = {aed3328964c60f160d68c6d4fefd4a44}, intrahash = {3788fdf407fa86d8cd9cc56f2b0d8c0e}, issn = {1545-2093}, journal = {Annual review of public health}, keywords = {externalvalidity implementationscience interruptedtimeseries prepost quasi-experimentaldesign steppedwedge}, month = {4}, note = {Tipus d'estudis; Introductori; CER; Sèries temporals; Stepped-wedge; Prepost<br/><br/>Definicions<br/>Gràfics}, number = 1, pages = {5-25}, pmid = {29328873}, timestamp = {2023-02-03T11:44:35.000+0100}, title = {Selecting and Improving Quasi-Experimental Designs in Effectiveness and Implementation Research.}, url = {http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040617-014128 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29328873}, volume = 39, year = 2018 }