Evaluating complex interventions: Perspectives and issues for health behaviour change interventions |
| |
Authors: | Cyril Tarquinio Joëlle Kivits Laetitia Minary Joël Coste |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. Laboratoire de psychologie – Université de Metz, METZ cedex 1, France;2. Université de Lorraine, Université Paris Descartes, Apemac, EA 4360, Nancy, F-54 000, France;3. Université de Lorraine, Université Paris Descartes, Apemac, EA 4360, Nancy, F-54 000, France;4. Université de Lorraine, Faculté de Médecine, Ecole de Santé Publique, Nancy, F-54 000, France;5. CHU Nancy, Epidémiologie et Evaluation Cliniques, Nancy, F-54 000, France;6. INSERM, CIC-EC, CIE6, Nancy, F-54 000, France;7. Département de Biostatistique, Pavillon Saint-Jacques, H?pital COCHIN, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint-Jacques, 75674, Paris Cedex 14, France |
| |
Abstract: | Objective: Health behaviour change interventions (HBCIs), used in health education, health promotion, patient education and psychotherapy areas, are considered complex interventions. The objective of this article is to discuss the value and limitations of using randomised clinical trials (RCTs) to asses HBCIs.Methods: A scoping review of the literature was conducted to identify the main challenges of using RCTs for evaluating HBCIs. The issues were illustrated by case studies selected from research conducted by our multidisciplinary team.Results: In complex interventions, effects are produced not only by the intervention, but are strongly linked to context. Issues relating to transferability of results are therefore critical, and require adjustments to the RCT model. Sampling bias, biases related to the experimental conditions and biases due to the absence of double-blindness were examined and illustrated by case studies.Conclusion: The results underline the importance of a multidisciplinary approach. They call for adapted or alternative evaluation models that overcome the limitations of RCTs. |
| |
Keywords: | behaviour psychology public health health promotion health education randomised controlled trial evaluation studies bias complex interventions |
|
|