Current use was established and Cochrane guidance on selection of social theories for systematic reviews of complex interventions was developed

Abstract Objective To identify examples of how social theories are used in systematic reviews of complex interventions to inform production of Cochrane guidance. Study Design and Setting Secondary analysis of published/unpublished examples of theories of social phenomena for use in reviews of comple...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of clinical epidemiology 2016-07, Vol.75, p.78-92
Hauptverfasser: Noyes, Jane, Hendry, Maggie, Booth, Andrew, Chandler, Jackie, Lewin, Simon, Glenton, Claire, Garside, Ruth
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Objective To identify examples of how social theories are used in systematic reviews of complex interventions to inform production of Cochrane guidance. Study Design and Setting Secondary analysis of published/unpublished examples of theories of social phenomena for use in reviews of complex interventions identified through scoping searches, engagement with key authors and methodologists supplemented by snowballing and reference searching. Theories were classified (low-level, mid-range, grand). Results Over 100 theories were identified with evidence of proliferation over the last 5 years. New low-level theories (tools, taxonomies, etc) have been developed for classifying and reporting complex interventions. Numerous mid-range theories are used; one example demonstrated how control theory had changed the review's findings. Review-specific logic models are increasingly used, but these can be challenging to develop. New low-level and mid-range psychological theories of behavior change are evolving. No reviews using grand theory (e.g., feminist theory) were identified. We produced a searchable Wiki, Mendeley Inventory, and Cochrane guidance. Conclusions Use of low-level theory is common and evolving; incorporation of mid-range theory is still the exception rather than the norm. Methodological work is needed to evaluate the contribution of theory. Choice of theory reflects personal preference; application of theory is a skilled endeavor.
ISSN:0895-4356
1878-5921
DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.12.009