从RCT到证据分级评价系统：循证实践在社会科学领域的发展现状_《中国循证医学杂志》

作者：

Robert Boruch , 芮宁

美国宾夕法尼亚大学社会政策研究与评估中心;

关键词：

DOI：

10.7507/1672-2531.20090006

视频：

导出 下载 收藏 扫码 引用

摘要 全文 图表 视频 参考文献 施引文献 补充材料

引用本文： Robert Boruch,芮宁. 从RCT到证据分级评价系统：循证实践在社会科学领域的发展现状. 中国循证医学杂志, 2009, 09(1): 12-18. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.20090006 复制

1.	Campbell DT, Stanley JC. Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Research. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally, 1966.
2.	Hostetler L. Qing connections to the early modern world: Ethnography and cartography in eighteenth-century China. Modern Asian Studies, 2000, 34: 623-662.
3.	Flay BR, Biglan A, Boruch RF, et al. Standards of evidence: Criteria for efficacy, effectiveness and dissemination. Prevention Science, 2005, 6: 151-175.
4.	Boruch RF. Randomized Experiments for Planning and Evaluation: A Practical Guide. Thousand oaks, California: Sage, 1997.
5.	Mosteller F, Boruch RF (eds.). Evidence Matters: Randomized Trials in Education Research. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2002.
6.	Weisburd D. Hot spots policing and criminal justice: Research lessons from the field. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 2005, 599: 220-245.
7.	Petrosino A, Turpin-Petrosino C, Buehler J. “Scared Straight” and other juvenile awareness programs for preventing juvenile delinquency (Updated C2 Review). In: The Campbell Collaboration Reviews of Intervention and Policy Evaluations (C2-RIPE), November. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Campbell Collaboration, 2002. Available from: http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/docpdf/ssr.pdf.
8.	Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D’Amico R, et al. Evaluating non-randomized intervention studies. Health Technology Assessment, 2003, 7: 1-173.
9.	Glazerman S, Levy D, Myers D. Nonexperimental versus experimental estimates of earnings impacts. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 2003, 589: 63-93.
10.	Shadish WR, Clark MH. A randomized experiment comparing random to nonrandom assignment. Paper presented at the meeting of the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness. Washington, DC, 2006.
11.	McCord J. Cures that harm: Unanticipated outcomes of crime prevention programs. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 2003, 587: 16-30.
12.	Boruch RF, Herman R. The Institute of Education Sciences’ What Works Clearinghouse (Chapter 11). In: Subotnik RF, Walberg HJ, eds. The Scientific Basis of Educational Productivity. Greenwich, Connecticut: Information Age Publishing (IAP), 2006, 269-282.
13.	Dec 2006]. Available from: http://www.tcrecord.org/Content. asp?ContentID=12887.
14.	Leff HS, Conley J, Elmore S. Making the Grade: A Review and Comparison of Evidence Grading Systems. Prepared for the National Research Council. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Human Services Research Institute, 2005. Available from: http//:www.tecathsri.org.
15.	Schaubroeck J, Muralidhar K. A meta-analysis of the relative effects of tabular and graphic display formats on decision-making performance. Human Performance, 1991, 4: 127-145.
16.	Chau PYK. An empirical study evaluating the usefulness of dynamic graphical display in decision support. Journal of Information Science, 1995, 21: 201-208.
17.	Nye C, Turner HM, Schwartz, JB. Approaches to parental involvement for improving the academic performance of elementary school children in grades K-6. Education Coordinating Group, The Compbell Collaboration, 2006. Available from http:// campbellcollaboration.org/doc-pdf/Nye_PI_review.pdf.
18.	Boruch RF, Boe EE. On “Good Certain and Easy Government”: Policy use of statistical data and reports. In: Sechrest L, Backer TE, Rogers EM, Campbell TF, and Grady ML, eds. Effective Dissemination of Clinical and Health Information (No 95-0015, P-543). Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 1994, 23-36.
19.	Soydan H. Applying randomized controlled trials and systematic research reviews in social work research. Research on Social Work Practice, 2008, 18: 311-318.
20.	Tseng V. Studying the use of research evidence in policy and practice. In: Annual Report of the William T. Grant Foundation. New York: William T. Grant Foundation, 2008, 12-18.
21.	Slavin RE. Evidence-Based Reform and No Child Left Behind: Next time, use what works. Teacher College Record [published on.
22.	Chalmers I. Trying to do more good than harm in policy and practice: The role of rigorous, transparent, up-to-date evaluations. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 2003, 589: 22-40.
23.	Sweet M, Moynihan R. Improving Population Health: The Uses of Systematic Reviews. Milbank Memorial Fund and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2007. Available from: http://www. milbank.org/reports/0712populationhealth/0712populationhealth. html.

1. Campbell DT, Stanley JC. Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Research. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally, 1966.
2. Hostetler L. Qing connections to the early modern world: Ethnography and cartography in eighteenth-century China. Modern Asian Studies, 2000, 34: 623-662.
3. Flay BR, Biglan A, Boruch RF, et al. Standards of evidence: Criteria for efficacy, effectiveness and dissemination. Prevention Science, 2005, 6: 151-175.
4. Boruch RF. Randomized Experiments for Planning and Evaluation: A Practical Guide. Thousand oaks, California: Sage, 1997.
5. Mosteller F, Boruch RF (eds.). Evidence Matters: Randomized Trials in Education Research. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2002.
6. Weisburd D. Hot spots policing and criminal justice: Research lessons from the field. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 2005, 599: 220-245.
7. Petrosino A, Turpin-Petrosino C, Buehler J. “Scared Straight” and other juvenile awareness programs for preventing juvenile delinquency (Updated C2 Review). In: The Campbell Collaboration Reviews of Intervention and Policy Evaluations (C2-RIPE), November. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Campbell Collaboration, 2002. Available from: http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/docpdf/ssr.pdf.
8. Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D’Amico R, et al. Evaluating non-randomized intervention studies. Health Technology Assessment, 2003, 7: 1-173.
9. Glazerman S, Levy D, Myers D. Nonexperimental versus experimental estimates of earnings impacts. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 2003, 589: 63-93.
10. Shadish WR, Clark MH. A randomized experiment comparing random to nonrandom assignment. Paper presented at the meeting of the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness. Washington, DC, 2006.
11. McCord J. Cures that harm: Unanticipated outcomes of crime prevention programs. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 2003, 587: 16-30.
12. Boruch RF, Herman R. The Institute of Education Sciences’ What Works Clearinghouse (Chapter 11). In: Subotnik RF, Walberg HJ, eds. The Scientific Basis of Educational Productivity. Greenwich, Connecticut: Information Age Publishing (IAP), 2006, 269-282.
13. Dec 2006]. Available from: http://www.tcrecord.org/Content. asp?ContentID=12887.
14. Leff HS, Conley J, Elmore S. Making the Grade: A Review and Comparison of Evidence Grading Systems. Prepared for the National Research Council. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Human Services Research Institute, 2005. Available from: http//:www.tecathsri.org.
15. Schaubroeck J, Muralidhar K. A meta-analysis of the relative effects of tabular and graphic display formats on decision-making performance. Human Performance, 1991, 4: 127-145.
16. Chau PYK. An empirical study evaluating the usefulness of dynamic graphical display in decision support. Journal of Information Science, 1995, 21: 201-208.
17. Nye C, Turner HM, Schwartz, JB. Approaches to parental involvement for improving the academic performance of elementary school children in grades K-6. Education Coordinating Group, The Compbell Collaboration, 2006. Available from http:// campbellcollaboration.org/doc-pdf/Nye_PI_review.pdf.
18. Boruch RF, Boe EE. On “Good Certain and Easy Government”: Policy use of statistical data and reports. In: Sechrest L, Backer TE, Rogers EM, Campbell TF, and Grady ML, eds. Effective Dissemination of Clinical and Health Information (No 95-0015, P-543). Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 1994, 23-36.
19. Soydan H. Applying randomized controlled trials and systematic research reviews in social work research. Research on Social Work Practice, 2008, 18: 311-318.
20. Tseng V. Studying the use of research evidence in policy and practice. In: Annual Report of the William T. Grant Foundation. New York: William T. Grant Foundation, 2008, 12-18.
21. Slavin RE. Evidence-Based Reform and No Child Left Behind: Next time, use what works. Teacher College Record [published on.
22. Chalmers I. Trying to do more good than harm in policy and practice: The role of rigorous, transparent, up-to-date evaluations. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 2003, 589: 22-40.
23. Sweet M, Moynihan R. Improving Population Health: The Uses of Systematic Reviews. Milbank Memorial Fund and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2007. Available from: http://www. milbank.org/reports/0712populationhealth/0712populationhealth. html.

《中国循证医学杂志》

从RCT到证据分级评价系统：循证实践在社会科学领域的发展现状

摘要 全文 图表 视频 参考文献 施引文献 补充材料

上一篇

下一篇

Format

Content

《中国循证医学杂志》

从RCT到证据分级评价系统：循证实践在社会科学领域的发展现状

摘要 全文 图表 视频 参考文献 施引文献 补充材料

上一篇

下一篇

Format

Content

摘要全文图表视频参考文献施引文献补充材料