Zarit Steven H, Bangerter Lauren R, Liu Yin, Rovine Michael J
a Department of Human Development and Family Studies , The Pennsylvania State University , State College , PA , USA.
Aging Ment Health. 2017 Mar;21(3):224-231. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2015.1128881. Epub 2016 Jan 5.
There is growing emphasis on empirical validation of the efficacy of community-based services for older people and their families, but research on services such as respite care faces methodological challenges that have limited the growth of outcome studies. We identify problems associated with the usual research approaches for studying respite care, with the goal of stimulating use of novel and more appropriate research designs that can lead to improved studies of community-based services.
Using the concept of research validity, we evaluate the methodological approaches in the current literature on respite services, including adult day services, in-home respite and overnight respite.
Although randomized control trials (RCTs) are possible in community settings, validity is compromised by practical limitations of randomization and other problems. Quasi-experimental and interrupted time series designs offer comparable validity to RCTs and can be implemented effectively in community settings.
An emphasis on RCTs by funders and researchers is not supported by scientific evidence. Alternative designs can lead to development of a valid body of research on community services such as respite.
对于为老年人及其家庭提供的社区服务的效果进行实证验证的重视程度日益增加，但诸如临时护理等服务的研究面临方法学挑战，这限制了结果研究的发展。我们确定与研究临时护理的常用研究方法相关的问题，目的是促进使用新颖且更合适的研究设计，从而改进对社区服务的研究。
运用研究效度的概念，我们评估当前关于包括成人日托服务、居家临时护理和过夜临时护理在内的临时服务文献中的方法学方法。
虽然在社区环境中进行随机对照试验（RCT）是可行的，但随机化的实际限制和其他问题损害了效度。准实验和中断时间序列设计与RCT具有相当的效度，并且可以在社区环境中有效实施。
资助者和研究人员对RCT的强调没有科学依据支持。替代设计可以推动形成关于诸如临时护理等社区服务的有效研究体系。
