Quasi-experimental study designs series: paper 1 : introduction: two historical lineages
Objectives: The objective of this study was to contrast the historical development of experiments and quasi-experiments and provide the motivation for a journal series on quasi-experimental designs in health research. Study Design and Setting: A short historical narrative, with concrete examples, an...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article (Journal) |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
8 July 2017
|
| In: |
Journal of clinical epidemiology
Year: 2017, Volume: 89, Pages: 4-11 |
| ISSN: | 1878-5921 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.02.020 |
| Online Access: | Verlag, Volltext: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.02.020 Verlag, Volltext: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435617307485 
|
| Author Notes: | Till Bärnighausen, John-Arne Røttingen, Peter Rockers, Ian Shemilt, Peter Tugwell |
| Summary: | Objectives: The objective of this study was to contrast the historical development of experiments and quasi-experiments and provide the motivation for a journal series on quasi-experimental designs in health research. Study Design and Setting: A short historical narrative, with concrete examples, and arguments based on an understanding of the practice of health research and evidence synthesis. Results: Health research has played a key role in developing today's gold standard for causal inference—the randomized controlled multiply blinded trial. Historically, allocation approaches developed from convenience and purposive allocation to alternate and, finally, to random allocation. This development was motivated both by concerns for manipulation in allocation as well as statistical and theoretical developments demonstrating the power of randomization in creating counterfactuals for causal inference. In contrast to the sequential development of experiments, quasi-experiments originated at very different points in time, from very different scientific perspectives, and with frequent and long interruptions in their methodological development. Health researchers have only recently started to recognize the value of quasi-experiments for generating novel insights on causal relationships. Conclusion: While quasi-experiments are unlikely to replace experiments in generating the efficacy and safety evidence required for clinical guidelines and regulatory approval of medical technologies, quasi-experiments can play an important role in establishing the effectiveness of health care practice, programs, and policies. The papers in this series describe and discuss a range of important issues in utilizing quasi-experimental designs for primary research and quasi-experimental results for evidence synthesis. |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | Published online 8 July 2017 Gesehen am 02.08.2018 |
| Physical Description: | Online Resource |
| ISSN: | 1878-5921 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.02.020 |