Skip to main content

The ‘Best Available Evidence’ Could Be Better: Evidence from Systematic Reviews of Organizational Interventions

  • Chapter

Abstract

Evidence-informed decision-making assumes that people are more likely to make good decisions if they are informed by the best available evidence. ‘Best’ is a subjective concept. Researchers routinely make judgments about the quality of evidence and quality appraisal is part of the systematic review process. Systematic reviews of the health effects of organizational interventions have tended to find that evaluations have a high risk of bias and little to say about contexts, mechanisms and implementation. Practitioners therefore have to make decisions when the supporting evidence is poor, and when variations in outcomes may be due to differences in how the intervention has been theorised, implemented or evaluated. This chapter uses systematic review findings to illustrate this apparent methodological failing before it describes how more robust studies of organizational change can be achieved from cluster RCTs with mixed methods process evaluations.

Keywords

  • Workplace health
  • Systematic review
  • Evaluation

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-94-017-9867-9_28
  • Chapter length: 7 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-94-017-9867-9
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)

References

  • Bambra, C., Gibson, M., Sowden, A., Wright, K., Whitehead, M., & Petticrew, M. (2009). Working for health? Evidence from systematic reviews on the effects on health and health inequalities of organisational changes to the work environment. Preventive Medicine, 48, 454–461.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bambra, C., Gibson, M., Sowden, A., Wright, K., Whitehead, M., & Petticrew, M. (2010). Tackling the wider social determinants of health and health inequalities: Evidence from systematic reviews. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 64, 284–289.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bond, L., & Butler, H. (2009). The Gatehouse Project: A multi-level integrated approach to promoting wellbeing in schools. In A. Killoran & M. Kelly (Eds.), Evidence-based public health: Effectiveness and efficiency (pp. 250–269). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bond, L., Glover, S., Godfrey, C., Butler, H., & Patton, G. C. (2001). Building capacity in schools: Lessons from the Gatehouse Project. Special issue on policy and system level approaches to health promotion in Australia. Health Education & Behavior, 28, 368–383.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bonell, C., Fletcher, A., Morton, M., & Lorenc, T. (2013). Realist randomised controlled trials’: A new approach to evaluating complex public health interventions. Social Science and Medicine, 75, 2299–2306.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Craig, P., Dieppe, P., Macintyre, S., Michie, S., Nazareth, I., & Petticrew, M. (2008). Developing and evaluating complex interventions: New guidance. Glasgow: Medical Research Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, P., Cooper, C., Gunnell, D., Haw, A., Lawson, K., Macintyre, S., et al. (2012). Using natural experiments to evaluate population health interventions. Glasgow: Medical Research Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egan, M., Bambra, C., Thomas, S., Petticrew, M., Whitehead, M., & Thomson, H. (2007). The psychosocial and health effects of workplace reorganisation 1: A systematic review of organisational-level interventions that aim to increase employee control. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 61, 945–954.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Egan, M., Bambra, C., Petticrew, M., & Whitehead, M. (2009). Reviewing evidence on complex social interventions: appraising implementation in systematic reviews of the health effects of organisational-level workplace interventions. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 63, 4–11.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hawe, P., Shiell, A., & Riley, T. (2004). Complex interventions: How “out of control” can a randomized control trial be? British Medical Journal, 328, 561–1563.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ogilvie, D., Egan, M., Hamilton, V., & Petticrew, M. (2005). Systematic reviews of health effects of social interventions: 2. Best available evidence: how low should you go? Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 59, 886–892.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Petticrew, M., Tugwell, P., Kristjansson, E., Oliver, S., Ueffing, E., & Welch, V. (2011). Damned if you do, damned if you don’t: Subgroup analysis and equity. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 66, 95–98.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Shiell, A., Hawe, P., & Gold, L. (2008). Complex interventions or complex systems? Implications for health economic evaluation. British Medical Journal, 336, 1281–1283.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matt Egan PhD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Egan, M., Bond, L. (2015). The ‘Best Available Evidence’ Could Be Better: Evidence from Systematic Reviews of Organizational Interventions. In: Karanika-Murray, M., Biron, C. (eds) Derailed Organizational Interventions for Stress and Well-Being. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9867-9_28

Download citation