Evaluating clinical systems: the social programme perspective

Author:

Heathfield H. A.1

Affiliation:

1. Manchester University, IT Perspectives Ltd, 27 Velvet House, 60 Sackville Street, Manchester M1 3WE, UK

Abstract

Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are seen as the ‘gold standard’ for the evaluation of mature clinical systems. The author contests this viewpoint and argues for an alternative approach derived from the evaluation of social programmes. RCTs assume the experimental system is a black box, the emphasis being to establish the presence of a causal link between the intervention and outcome, but not to understand the mechanism by which the outcome occurs. Conversely, the social programme perspective recognizes explicitly that for changes in outcome to occur, a mechanism and sustaining context is needed, and that both of these can, and should be, studied in detail. This perspective causes a subtle shift in the emphasis and experimental approach of an evaluation, and can provide valuable information to assist a major goal in medical informatics; to engineer useful and useable systems and devise strategies to ensure they are successfully deployed into routine clinical practice.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Health Informatics

Cited by 6 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3