Comparison communities in a cluster randomised trial innovate in response to ‘being controlled’
Penelope Hawe,
Therese Riley,
Alexandra Gartrell,
Karen Turner,
Claudia Canales and
Darlene Omstead
Social Science & Medicine, 2015, vol. 133, issue C, 102-110
Abstract:
We conducted qualitative interviews among primary health care teams and community agencies in eight communities in Victoria, Australia which had (1) agreed to be part of a universal primary care and community development intervention to reduce post natal depression and promote maternal health; and (2) were randomised to the comparison arm. The purpose was to document their experience with and interpretation of the trial. Although ‘control’ in a controlled trial refers to the control of confounding of the trial result by factors other than allocation to the intervention, participants interpreted ‘control’ to mean restrictions on what they were allowed to do during the trial period. They had agreed not to use the Edinburgh Post Natal Depression Scale or the SF 36 in clinical practice and not to implement any of the elements of the intervention. We found that no elements of the intervention were implemented. However, the extension of the trial from three to five years made the trial agreement a strain. The imposition of trial conditions also encouraged a degree of lateral thinking and innovation in service delivery (quality improvement). This may have potentially contributed to the null trial results. The observations invite interrogation of intervention theory and consequent rethinking of the way contamination in a cluster trial is defined.
Keywords: Cluster-randomised trial; Intervention theory; Comparison group; Qualitative research; Edinburgh post natal depression scale; Quality improvement; Contamination (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:
Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027795361500177X
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
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:eee:socmed:v:133:y:2015:i:c:p:102-110
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
http://www.elsevier. ... _01_ooc_1&version=01
DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.03.033
Access Statistics for this article
Social Science & Medicine is currently edited by Ichiro (I.) Kawachi and S.V. (S.V.) Subramanian
More articles in Social Science & Medicine from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().