Comparing rating paradigms for evidence-based program registers in behavioral health: Evidentiary criteria and implications for assessing programs |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Center of Studies on Alcohol and Addictions. Hospital Civil de Guadalajara FAA, CUCS, Universidad de Guadalajara, Mexico;2. Servicio de Biología Molecular en Medicina, Hospital Civil de Guadalajara FAA, Universidad de Guadalajara, Mexico;1. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada;3. Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada;6. Inflammatory Bowel Disease Clinical and Research Centre, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada;4. Manitoba Centre for Health Policy, Winnipeg, Canada;1. Food Science Department, FARAH, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium;2. Microbiology Unit, Catholic University of Louvain, Brussels, Belgium;3. Equine Teaching Hospital, Clinical Department of Companion Animals and Equids, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium;1. Neumología, Área integrada de gestión de Medicina, Hospital de Alta Resolución de Loja, APES Hospital de Poniente, Granada, Spain;2. Servicio de Neumología, Unidad de Investigación, Hospital Universitario Nuestra Señora de la Candelaria, Tenerife, Spain;3. Servicio de Neumología, Hospital Universitari Vall d’Hebron, Barcelona, Spain;4. Servicio de Neumología, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain;5. Servicio de Neumología, Hospital San Pedro de Alcántara, Cáceres, Spain;1. University of Louisville, 309 College of Education, Louisville, KY 40292, USA;2. Department of Educational Measurement and Statistics, University of Iowa, 361 Lindquist Center (South), Iowa City, IA 52242, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | Decision makers need timely and credible information about the effectiveness of behavioral health interventions. Online evidence-based program registers (EBPRs) have been developed to address this need. However, the methods by which these registers determine programs and practices as being “evidence-based” has not been investigated in detail. This paper examines the evidentiary criteria EBPRs use to rate programs and the implications for how different registers rate the same programs. Although the registers tend to employ a standard Campbellian hierarchy of evidence to assess evaluation results, there is also considerable disagreement among the registers about what constitutes an adequate research design and sufficient data for designating a program as evidence-based. Additionally, differences exist in how registers report findings of “no effect,” which may deprive users of important information. Of all programs on the 15 registers that rate individual programs, 79% appear on only one register. Among a random sample of 100 programs rated by more than one register, 42% were inconsistently rated by the multiple registers to some degree. |
| |
| Keywords: | Evidence-based programs Evidence-based practices Best practices Evidence-based program registers Standards of evidence Hierarchies of evidence Treatment effectiveness Behavioral health |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
