Abraham Charles, Johnson Blair T, de Bruin Marijn, Luszczynska Aleksandra
*University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom; †Center for Health, Intervention, and Prevention, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT; ‡Health Psychology Group, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom; §University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Warsaw, Poland; and ‖Trauma, Health, & Hazards Center, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, CO.
J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2014 Aug 15;66 Suppl 3:S293-9. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000000231.
: Many behavior change interventions for the prevention and treatment of HIV have been evaluated, but suboptimal reporting of evaluations hinders the accumulation of evidence and the replication of interventions. In this article, we address 4 practices contributing to this problem. First, detailed descriptions of the interventions and their implementation are often unavailable. Second, content of active control group content (such as usual care or support designed by researchers) often varies markedly between trials; yet, descriptions of this content are routinely omitted. Third, detailed process evaluations revealing the mechanisms by which interventions generate their effects, and among whom, frequently are not available. Fourth, there is a lack of replication in other contexts, which limits knowledge of external validity. This article advances recommendations made by an international group of scholars constituting the Workgroup for Intervention Development and Evaluation Research (WIDER), which has developed brief guidance to journal editors to improve the reporting of evaluations of behavior change interventions, thereby serving as an addition to reporting statements such as CONSORT. Improved reporting standards would facilitate and accelerate the development of the science of behavior change and its application in implementation science to improve public health.
许多用于预防和治疗艾滋病病毒的行为改变干预措施都已得到评估,但评估报告的不理想阻碍了证据的积累和干预措施的复制。在本文中,我们探讨了导致这一问题的4种做法。首先,干预措施及其实施的详细描述往往难以获取。其次,活性对照组的内容(如研究人员设计的常规护理或支持)在不同试验之间往往差异显著;然而,对这一内容的描述却常常被省略。第三,揭示干预措施产生效果的机制以及哪些人会产生效果的详细过程评估往往无法获得。第四,在其他背景下缺乏重复研究,这限制了对外部效度的了解。本文提出了由构成干预发展与评估研究工作组(WIDER)的国际学者小组所给出的建议,该小组已为期刊编辑制定了简短指南,以改进行为改变干预措施评估的报告,从而作为对CONSORT等报告声明的补充。改进的报告标准将促进和加速行为改变科学的发展及其在实施科学中的应用,以改善公众健康。