Flynn Brian S, Worden John K, Bunn Janice Yanushka
Office of Health Promotion Research, College of Medicine, University of Vermont, Burlington Vermont 05401, USA.
Commun Methods Meas. 2009 Jan 1;3(1):12-28. doi: 10.1080/19312450902809490.
This paper compares two controlled trials of mass media interventions, factors influencing their designs, and design lessons learned from these experiences. Mass media evaluations based on a scientific research model are motivated by gaps in knowledge. The results of such research are intended to serve the needs of consensus development processes through which confident recommendations can be made for intervention strategies that should be more widely applied. For these purposes, the scientific research context emphasizes internal validity of evaluation design, such as controlled experiments. This paper describes two such trials, implemented at different times with differing social contexts for youth cigarette smoking, smoking prevention research evidence bases, and tobacco control environments. Common and unique features of the two trials are reviewed, and observations are noted about the conditions under which controlled trials of mass media interventions might be warranted.
本文比较了两项大众媒体干预的对照试验、影响其设计的因素,以及从这些经验中汲取的设计经验教训。基于科学研究模型的大众媒体评估是由知识空白所推动的。此类研究的结果旨在满足共识形成过程的需求,通过该过程可为应更广泛应用的干预策略提出可靠的建议。出于这些目的,科学研究背景强调评估设计的内部有效性,如对照实验。本文描述了两项这样的试验,它们在不同时间实施,针对青少年吸烟的社会背景、预防吸烟研究证据基础和烟草控制环境各不相同。回顾了这两项试验的共同和独特特征,并记录了关于在何种条件下可能有必要进行大众媒体干预对照试验的观察结果。