首页> 外文OA文献 >Reviewing evidence on complex social interventions: appraising implementation in systematic reviews of the health effects of organisational-level workplace interventions.
【2h】

Reviewing evidence on complex social interventions: appraising implementation in systematic reviews of the health effects of organisational-level workplace interventions.

机译:审查有关复杂的社会干预措施的证据:在对组织级工作场所干预措施的健康影响进行系统评估时,评估实施情况。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Objective: We appraised the reporting of intervention implementation in studies included in systematic reviews of organisational-level workplace interventions. Implementation is taken to include such factors as intervention setting, resources, planning, collaborations, delivery and macro-level socio-economic contexts. Understanding how implementation affects intervention outcomes may help prevent erroneous conclusions and misleading assumptions about generalisability, but implementation must be adequately reported if it is to be taken into account. ududDesign: Data on implementation was obtained from four systematic reviews of complex interventions in workplace settings. Implementation was appraised using a specially-developed checklist, and by means of an unstructured reading of the text. ududResults: We identified and appraised 103 studies evaluating 4 types of organisational-level workplace intervention (employee participation, changing job tasks, shift changes and compressed working weeks). Many studies referred to implementation but reporting was generally poor and anecdotal in form. This poor quality of reporting did not vary greatly by type or date of publication. A minority of studies described how implementation may have influenced outcomes. These descriptions were more usefully explored through an unstructured reading of the text, rather than by means of the checklist. ududConclusions: Evaluations of complex interventions should include more detailed reporting of implementation and consider how to measure quality of implementation. Our checklist helped us explore the poor reporting of implementation in a more systematic fashion. In terms of interpreting study findings and their transferability, the more qualitative appraisals however appeared to offer greater potential for exploring how implementation may influence the findings of specific evaluations. Implementation appraisal techniques for systematic reviews of complex interventions require further development and testing.
机译:目的:我们评估了组织级工作场所干预的系统评价中包括的研究中干预实施的报告。采取的执行措施包括干预因素,资源,计划,合作,交付和宏观社会经济背景等因素。了解实施方式如何影响干预结果可能有助于防止关于可推广性的错误结论和误导性假设,但是如果要考虑实施情况,则必须充分报告实施情况。 ud udDesign:有关实施的数据来自对工作场所环境中的复杂干预措施的四次系统评估。使用特别制定的清单和通过对文本进行非结构化阅读来评估实施情况。 ud ud结果:我们确定并评估了103项研究,评估了4种类型的组织级工作场所干预(员工参与,工作任务变更,轮班变更和压缩工作周)。许多研究都提到实施,但报告总体上很差,而且形式还很有趣。报告质量差,出版类型或出版日期变化不大。少数研究描述了实施可能如何影响结果。通过非结构化阅读文本,而不是通过清单,可以更有效地探索这些描述。结论:对复杂干预措施的评估应包括更详细的实施报告,并考虑如何衡量实施质量。我们的清单帮助我们以更系统的方式探索了糟糕的实施报告。在解释研究结果及其可移植性方面,更具定性的评估似乎为探索实施可能如何影响特定评估结果提供了更大的潜力。系统评估复杂干预措施的实施评估技术需要进一步的开发和测试。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号