Abstract
Evidence-informed decision-making assumes that people are more likely to make good decisions if they are informed by the best available evidence. ‘Best’ is a subjective concept. Researchers routinely make judgments about the quality of evidence and quality appraisal is part of the systematic review process. Systematic reviews of the health effects of organizational interventions have tended to find that evaluations have a high risk of bias and little to say about contexts, mechanisms and implementation. Practitioners therefore have to make decisions when the supporting evidence is poor, and when variations in outcomes may be due to differences in how the intervention has been theorised, implemented or evaluated. This chapter uses systematic review findings to illustrate this apparent methodological failing before it describes how more robust studies of organizational change can be achieved from cluster RCTs with mixed methods process evaluations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bambra, C., Gibson, M., Sowden, A., Wright, K., Whitehead, M., & Petticrew, M. (2009). Working for health? Evidence from systematic reviews on the effects on health and health inequalities of organisational changes to the work environment. Preventive Medicine, 48, 454–461.
Bambra, C., Gibson, M., Sowden, A., Wright, K., Whitehead, M., & Petticrew, M. (2010). Tackling the wider social determinants of health and health inequalities: Evidence from systematic reviews. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 64, 284–289.
Bond, L., & Butler, H. (2009). The Gatehouse Project: A multi-level integrated approach to promoting wellbeing in schools. In A. Killoran & M. Kelly (Eds.), Evidence-based public health: Effectiveness and efficiency (pp. 250–269). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bond, L., Glover, S., Godfrey, C., Butler, H., & Patton, G. C. (2001). Building capacity in schools: Lessons from the Gatehouse Project. Special issue on policy and system level approaches to health promotion in Australia. Health Education & Behavior, 28, 368–383.
Bonell, C., Fletcher, A., Morton, M., & Lorenc, T. (2013). Realist randomised controlled trials’: A new approach to evaluating complex public health interventions. Social Science and Medicine, 75, 2299–2306.
Craig, P., Dieppe, P., Macintyre, S., Michie, S., Nazareth, I., & Petticrew, M. (2008). Developing and evaluating complex interventions: New guidance. Glasgow: Medical Research Council.
Craig, P., Cooper, C., Gunnell, D., Haw, A., Lawson, K., Macintyre, S., et al. (2012). Using natural experiments to evaluate population health interventions. Glasgow: Medical Research Council.
Egan, M., Bambra, C., Thomas, S., Petticrew, M., Whitehead, M., & Thomson, H. (2007). The psychosocial and health effects of workplace reorganisation 1: A systematic review of organisational-level interventions that aim to increase employee control. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 61, 945–954.
Egan, M., Bambra, C., Petticrew, M., & Whitehead, M. (2009). Reviewing evidence on complex social interventions: appraising implementation in systematic reviews of the health effects of organisational-level workplace interventions. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 63, 4–11.
Hawe, P., Shiell, A., & Riley, T. (2004). Complex interventions: How “out of control” can a randomized control trial be? British Medical Journal, 328, 561–1563.
Ogilvie, D., Egan, M., Hamilton, V., & Petticrew, M. (2005). Systematic reviews of health effects of social interventions: 2. Best available evidence: how low should you go? Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 59, 886–892.
Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London: Sage.
Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Petticrew, M., Tugwell, P., Kristjansson, E., Oliver, S., Ueffing, E., & Welch, V. (2011). Damned if you do, damned if you don’t: Subgroup analysis and equity. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 66, 95–98.
Shiell, A., Hawe, P., & Gold, L. (2008). Complex interventions or complex systems? Implications for health economic evaluation. British Medical Journal, 336, 1281–1283.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Egan, M., Bond, L. (2015). The ‘Best Available Evidence’ Could Be Better: Evidence from Systematic Reviews of Organizational Interventions. In: Karanika-Murray, M., Biron, C. (eds) Derailed Organizational Interventions for Stress and Well-Being. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9867-9_28
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9867-9_28
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-9866-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-9867-9
eBook Packages: Behavioral ScienceBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)