Tones K
Leeds Metropolitan University, UK.
Patient Educ Couns. 2000 Feb;39(2-3):227-36. doi: 10.1016/s0738-3991(99)00035-x.
The main purpose of this article is to question the relevance of the Randomised Controlled Trial for the evaluation of health promotion programmes. In its concern to manage Type 1 error, the RCT underestimates or virtually ignores Type 2 and 3 errors. Because of the peculiar complexities of health promotion programmes and the importance of gaining insights into the effect of interventions--rather than merely recording whether or not they achieve their goals--a new kind of validity is needed. The central assertion here is that we should adopt a principle of "judicial review" which is based on a broad spectrum of triangulated evidence.
本文的主要目的是质疑随机对照试验在评估健康促进项目方面的相关性。由于关注控制一类错误，随机对照试验低估或几乎忽略了二类和三类错误。鉴于健康促进项目的特殊复杂性以及深入了解干预效果（而非仅仅记录干预是否实现目标）的重要性，需要一种新的效度。这里的核心主张是，我们应采用基于广泛三角验证证据的“司法审查”原则。
