Citation

Handley MA, Lyles CR, McCulloch C, Cattamanchi A. Annu. Rev. Public Health 2018; 39: 5-25.

Affiliation

Department of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, University of California, San Francisco, California 94110, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2018, Annual Reviews)

DOI

10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040617-014128

PMID

29328873

Abstract

Interventional researchers face many design challenges when assessing intervention implementation in real-world settings. Intervention implementation requires holding fast on internal validity needs while incorporating external validity considerations (such as uptake by diverse subpopulations, acceptability, cost, and sustainability). Quasi-experimental designs (QEDs) are increasingly employed to achieve a balance between internal and external validity. Although these designs are often referred to and summarized in terms of logistical benefits, there is still uncertainty about (a) selecting from among various QEDs and (b) developing strategies to strengthen the internal and external validity of QEDs. We focus here on commonly used QEDs (prepost designs with nonequivalent control groups, interrupted time series, and stepped-wedge designs) and discuss several variants that maximize internal and external validity at the design, execution and implementation, and analysis stages. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Public Health Volume 39 is April 1, 2018. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Language: en