Alternatives to the randomized controlled trial

S.G. West, N. Duan, W. Pequegnat, P. Gaist, D.C. Des Jarlais, D. Holtgrave, J. Szapocznik, M. Fishbein, B. Rapkin, M. Clatts and P.D. Mullen

American Journal of Public Health, 2008, vol. 98, issue 8, 1359-1366

Abstract: Public health researchers are addressing new research questions (e.g., effects of environmental tobacco smoke, Hurricane Katrina) for which the randomized controlled trial (RCT) may not be a feasible option. Drawing on the potential outcomes framework (Rubin Causal Model) and Campbellian perspectives, we consider alternative research designs that permit relatively strong causal inferences. In randomized encouragement designs, participants are randomly invited to participate in one of the treatment conditions, but are allowed to decide whether to receive treatment. In quantitative assignment designs, treatment is assigned on the basis of a quantitative measure (e.g., need, merit, risk). In observational studies, treatment assignment is unknown and presumed to be nonrandom. Major threats to the validity of each design and statistical strategies for mitigating those threats are presented.

Date: 2008
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (13)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.2105/AJPH.2007.124446

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2007.124446_9

DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2007.124446

Access Statistics for this article

American Journal of Public Health is currently edited by Alfredo Morabia

More articles in American Journal of Public Health from American Public Health Association
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Christopher F Baum ().