MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1463084062 · doi:10.5287/ora-daykvyxed

Development of a CONSORT extension for social and psychological interventions

2014· dissertation· en· W1463084062 sur OpenAlexfundno aff
Sean Grant

Notice bibliographique

RevueOxford University Research Archive (ORA) (University of Oxford) · 2014
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueDelphi Technique in Research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesClarendon FundEconomic and Social Research CouncilHebrew University of JerusalemCardiff UniversityInstitute of Education, University of LondonUniversity of OxfordUniversity College LondonLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineUniversity of CambridgeYork UniversityVanderbilt University
Mots-clésConsolidated Standards of Reporting TrialsPsychological interventionCritical appraisalPsychologyDelphi methodSystematic reviewApplied psychologyMedical educationMedicineAlternative medicineMEDLINEPolitical scienceComputer sciencePsychiatry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

<b>Background:</b> Defined by their mechanisms, social and psychological interventions are those interventions that work through mental processes and social phenomena. They are often complex and challenging to evaluate, so understanding randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of these interventions requires detailed reports of the interventions tested and the methods used to assess them. However, reports of these RCTs often omit important information. Poor reporting hinders critical appraisal and synthesis of RCTs in systematic reviews, thereby impeding the effective transfer of research evidence to policy and practice. The Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement is a reporting guideline that has contributed to improvements in the quality of RCT manuscripts in journals publishing medical research. However, studies have shown persistent deficiencies in the reporting quality of social and psychological intervention trials. A new CONSORT extension for these interventions may be needed given their distinct and complex features. This DPhil thesis reports on a project to develop and disseminate an official CONSORT Extension for Social and Psychological Interventions: CONSORT-SPI. <b>Structure:</b> Following a preface, this DPhil thesis includes eight chapters. Chapter 1 provides an overview of the conceptual rationale that prompted the CONSORT-SPI project. Chapter 2 details the project protocol, which consists of a five-phase methodology that follows current best practices for reporting guideline development and dissemination. Chapter 3 discusses systematic literature reviews to assess reporting guidelines for and the reporting quality of publications of social and psychological intervention RCTs. Chapter 4 discusses an online, international Delphi process to generate a prioritised list of possible items to include in the CONSORT-SPI extension. Chapter 5 discusses a formal consensus meeting to select reporting items to add to or modify for the CONSORT-SPI Extension checklist. Chapter 6 involves drafts of the CONSORT-SPI checklist as well as a template for the Explanation and Elaboration (E&amp;E) document providing detailed advice and examples of good reporting for each checklist item. These drafts have not yet been circulated to co-authors or other members of the project team; their purpose in this thesis is to give an indication of how previous project phases have led into initial prototypes of the checklist and E&amp;E;, which will undergo further development and revision by the project team before publication. Chapter 7 proposes a coordinated dissemination and implementation strategy informed by theoretical frameworks and tools used to guide the implementation of clinical guidelines and empirically-supported interventions. The final chapter summarises the information gained from the CONSORT-SPI project to date, assesses strengths and limitations of the project methodology, and discusses implications for future research. <b>Conclusion:</b> A CONSORT-SPI Extension could improve the reporting quality of social and psychological intervention RCTs. This extension could also facilitate better critical appraisal of this body of research and its use in evidence-based decision-making. With successful dissemination and implementation, the guideline will hopefully contribute to the improvement of intervention evaluations—as well as the methodology underpinning these studies—within the social and behavioural sciences.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Études des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,671
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,002
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,218
Tête enseignante GPT0,442
Écart entre enseignants0,224 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations3
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueOxford University Research Archive (ORA) (University of Oxford)Même sujetDelphi Technique in ResearchTravaux en français237 207