Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T23:31:59.351Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2024

Chris Bonell ,
G. J. Melendez-Torres  and
Emily Warren
Chris Bonell
Affiliation:
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
G. J. Melendez-Torres
Affiliation:
University of Exeter
Emily Warren
Affiliation:
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Realist Trials and Systematic Reviews
Rigorous, Useful Evidence to Inform Health Policy
 , pp. 102 - 116
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Skivington, K, Matthews, L, Simpson, SA, et al. A new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions: Update of Medical Research Council guidance. British Medical Journal 2021;30(374):n2061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, G, Audrey, S, Barker, M, et al. Process Evaluation of Complex Interventions: UK Medical Research Council (MRC) Guidance. London: MRC Population Health Science Research Network 2014.Google Scholar
Medical Research Council. A Framework for the Development and Evaluation of Randomised Controlled Trials for Complex Interventions to Improve Health. London: MRC 2000.Google Scholar
Pronyk, PM, Hargreaves, JR, Kim, JC, et al. Effect of a structural intervention for the prevention of intimate-partner violence and HIV in rural South Africa: A cluster randomised trial. Lancet 2006;368(9551):1973–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hargreaves, J, Hatcher, A, Strange, V, et al. Process evaluation of the Intervention with Microfinance for AIDS and Gender Equity (IMAGE) in rural South Africa. Health Education Research 2010;25(1):27–40. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyp054.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nielsen, JH, Melendez-Torres, GJ, Rotevatn, TA, et al. How do reminder systems in follow-up screening for women with previous gestational diabetes work?: A realist review. BMC Health Services Research 2021;21(1):535. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06569-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawe, P, Shiell, A, Riley, T. Complex interventions: How ‘out of control’ can a randomised controlled trial be? British Medical Journal 2004;328:1561–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonell, C, Oakley, A, Hargreaves, J, et al. Trials of health interventions and empirical assessment of generalizability: Suggested framework and systematic review. British Medical Journal 2006;333:346–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, DB, Rhodes, T, Campe, S. Implementation of Multi-component Youth Programs to Prevent Teen Pregnancy Modelled after the Children’s AID Society: Carrera Program. Scotts Valley CA: ETR Associates 2005.Google Scholar
Philiber, S, Kaye, JW, Herrling, S. The National Evaluation of the Children’s Aid Society Carrera Model Program to Prevent Teen Pregnancy. New York: Philiber Research Associations 2001.Google Scholar
Wiggins, M, Bonell, C, Sawtell, M, et al. Health outcomes of youth development programme in England: Prospective matched comparison study. British Medical Journal 2009;339:b2534.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dishion, TJ, McCord, J, Poulin, F. When interventions harm. American Psychologist 1999;54(9):755–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hawe, P, Shiell, A, Riley, T. Theorising interventions as events in systems. American Journal of Community Psychology 2009;43(3–4):267–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sacks, H, Chalmers, TC, Smith, HJ. Randomized versus historical controls for clinical trials. American Journal of Medicine 1982;72:233–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hooker, W. Physician and Patient. New York: Baker and Scribner 1847.Google Scholar
Hawe, P, Shiell, A, Riley, T. Theorising interventions as events in systems. American Journal of Community Psychology 2009;43(3–4):267–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lorenc, T, Oliver, K. Adverse effects of public health interventions: A conceptual framework. Journal of Epidemiology Community Health 2014;68(3):288–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Killeen, T, Hien, D, Campbell, A, et al. Adverse events in an integrated trauma-focused intervention for women in community substance abuse treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 2008;35:304–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, MS, Marrocco, FA, Kleinman, M, et al. Evaluating iatrogenic risk of youth suicide screening programs: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of American Medical Association 2005;293:1635–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, SW, Hauben, M, Aronson, JK. Paradoxical and bidirectional drug effects. Drug Safety 2012;35(3):173–89.Google ScholarPubMed
Lorenc, T, Petticrew, M, Welch, V, et al. What types of interventions generate inequalities? Evidence from systematic reviews. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2013;67(2):190–93. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2012-201257.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomson, H, Hoskins, R, Petticrew, M, et al. Evaluating the health effects of social interventions. British Medical Journal 2004;328:282–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ross, D, Wight, D. The role of randomized controlled trials in assessing sexual health interventions. In: Stephenson, J, Imrie, J, Bonell, C, eds. Effective Sexual Health Interventions: Issues in Experimental Evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2003:35–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, DT. Methods for the experimenting society. American Journal of Evaluation 1991;12(3):223–60.Google Scholar
Popper, K. The Poverty of Historicism. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul 1957.Google Scholar
Merton, RK. Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: Free Press 1968.Google Scholar
Jay, D. The Socialist Case. London: Faber & Faber 1938.Google Scholar
Campbell, DT, Russo, JJ. Social Experimentation. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE 1999.Google Scholar
Lister, R. New labour: A study in ambiguity from a position of ambivalence. Critical Social Policy 2001;21(4):425–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mykhalovskiy, E, Weir, L. The problem of evidence-based medicine: Directions for social science. Social Science & Medicine 2004;59:1059–69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robertson, A. Shifting discourses on health in Canada: From health promotion to population health. Health Promotion International 1998;13(2):155–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wildgen, A, Denny, K. Health equity’s missing substance: (Re)Engaging the normative in public health discourse and knowledge making. Public Health Ethics 2020;13(3):247–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schrecker, T. Can health equity survive epidemiology? Standards of proof and social determinants of health. Preventive Medicine 2013;57(6):741–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parker, RG, Easton, D, Klein, CH. Structural barriers and facilitators in HIV prevention: A review of international research. AIDS 2000;14(Suppl 1):S22–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blankenship, KM, Reinhard, E, Sherman, SG, et al. Structural interventions for HIV prevention among women who use drugs: A global perspective. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome 2015;69(Suppl 2):S140–45. https://doi.org/10.1097/qai.0000000000000638.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohn, S, Clinch, M, Bunn, C, et al. Entangled complexity: Why complex interventions are just not complicated enough. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy 2013;18(1):40–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marchal, B, Westhorp, G, Wong, G, et al. Realist RCTs of complex interventions: An oxymoron. Social Science and Medicine 2013;94:124–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Belle, S, Wong, G, Westhorp, G, et al. Can ‘realist’ randomised controlled trials be genuinely realist? Trials 2016;17:313.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Craig, P, Dieppe, P, Macintyre, S, et al. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: The new Medical Research Council guidance. British Medical Journal 2008;337:a1655.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weinberger, M, Oddone, EZ, Henderson, WG, et al. Multisite randomized controlled trials in health services research: Scientific challenges and operational issues. Medical Care 2001;39(6):627–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Banerjee, AV, Duflo, E. The experimental approach to development economics. Annual Review of Economics 2009;1:151–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torgerson, CJ, Torgerson, DJ, Birks, YF, et al. A comparison of randomised controlled trials in health and education. British Educational Research Journal 2005;31:761–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonell, CP, Bennett, R, Oakley, AO. Sexual health should be subject to experimental evaluation. In: Stephenson, J, Imrie, J, Bonell, C, eds. Effective Sexual Health Interventions: Issues in Experimental Evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2003:3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chalmers, I, Altman, DG, eds. Systematic Reviews. London: BMJ Publishing Group 1995.Google Scholar
Littell, JH, Corcoran, J, Pillai, V. Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewin, CR, Bradley, C. Patient preferences and randomised controlled trials. British Medical Journal 1989;299:313–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonell, C, Hargreaves, JR, Strange, V, et al. Should structural interventions be evaluated using RCTs? The case of HIV prevention. Social Science & Medicine 2007;63(5):1135–42.Google Scholar
Grijalva, CG, Nuorti, JP, Arbogast, PJ, et al. Decline in pneumonia admissions after routine childhood immunisation with pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in the USA: A time-series analysis. Lancet 2007;369:1179–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong Schellenberg, JR, Adam, T, Mshinda, H, et al. Effectiveness and cost of facility-based Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI) in Tanzania. Lancet 2004;364(9445):1583–94.Google ScholarPubMed
Cowan, F, Plummer, M. Biological, behavioural and psychological outcome measures. In: Stephenson, J, Imrie, J, Bonell, C, eds. Effective Sexual Health Interventions: Issues in Experimental Evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2003:111–35.Google Scholar
Ogilvie, D, Foster, CE, Rothnie, H, et al. Interventions to promote walking: Systematic review. British Medical Journal 2007;334:1204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Criado Perez, C. Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Men. London: Random House 2019.Google Scholar
Gardner, F, Montgomery, P, Knerr, W. Transporting evidence-based parenting programs for child problem behavior (age 3–10) between countries: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology 2016;45(6):749–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baker, M. 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility. Nature 2016;533(7604):452–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burchett, HED, Kneale, D, Blanchard, L, et al. When assessing generalisability, focusing on differences in population or setting alone is insufficient. Trials 2020;21(1):286. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-4178-6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, JA, St Lawrence, JA, Stevenson, LY, et al. Community AIDS/HIV risk reduction: The effects of endorsements by popular people in three cities. American Journal of Public Health 1992;82(11):1483–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williamson, LM, Hart, GJ, Flowers, P, et al. The Gay Men’s Task Force: The impact of peer education on the sexual health behaviour of homosexual men in Glasgow. Sexually Transmitted Infections 2001;77:427–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, JA. Popular opinion leaders and HIV prevention peer education: Resolving discrepant findings, and implications for the development of effective community programmes. AIDS Care 2004;16(2):139–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hart, GJ, Williamson, LM, Flowers, P. Good in parts: The Gay Men’s Task Force in Glasgow – a response to Kelly. AIDS Care 2004;16(2):159–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pawson, R. Evidence-Based Policy: A Realist Perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pawson, R, Tilley, N. Realistic Evaluation. London: SAGE 1997.Google Scholar
Cartwright, N, Hardie, J. Evidence-Based Policy: A Practical Guide to Doing It Better. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehead, M. A typology of actions to tackle social inequalities in health. Journal of Epidemiol and Community Health 2007;61(6):473–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bryan, CJ, Tipton, E, Yeager, DS. Behavioural science is unlikely to change the world without a heterogeneity revolution. Nature Human Behaviour 2021;5:980–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fagan, AA, Mihalic, S. Strategies for enhancing the adoption of school-based prevention programs: Lessons learned from the blueprints for violence prevention replications of the life skills training program. Journal of Community Psychology 2003;31(3):235–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glasgow, RE, Vogt, TM, Boles, SM. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: The RE–AIM framework. American Journal of Public Health 1999;89:1322–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petticrew, M. Time to rethink the systematic review catechism? Moving from ‘what works’ to ‘what happens’. Systematic Reviews 2015;4(1):36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oakley, A, Strange, V, Bonell, C, et al. Integrating process evaluation in the design of randomised controlled trials of complex interventions: The example of the RIPPLE study. British Medical Journal 2006;332:413–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strange, V, Forrest, S, Oakley, A, et al. Peer-led sex education–characteristics of peer educators and their perceptions of the impact on them of participation in a peer education programme. Health Education Research 2002;17(3):327–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coker, AL, Bush, HM, Brancato, CJ, et al. Bystander program effectiveness to reduce violence acceptance: RCT in high schools. Journal of Family Violence 2019;34(3):153–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Main, C, Thomas, S, Ogilvie, D, et al. Population tobacco control interventions and their effects on social inequalities in smoking: Placing an equity lens on existing systematic reviews. BMC Public Health 2008;8:178.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farrington, DP, Ttofi, MM. School-based programs to reduce bullying and victimization. Campbell Systematic Reviews 2009;5(1):1–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipsey, MW. The primary factors that characterize effective interventions with juvenile offenders: A meta-analytic overview. Victims and Offenders 2009;4:124–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhaskar, R. A Realist Theory of Science. Leeds: Leeds Books 1975.Google Scholar
Bhaskar, R. The Possibility of Naturalism: A Philosophical Critique of the Contemporary Human Sciences. Brighton: Harvester 1979.Google Scholar
Sherman, L. Policing Domestic Violence. New York: Free Press 1992.Google Scholar
Dalkin, SM, Greenhalgh, J, Jones, D, et al. What’s in a mechanism? Development of a key concept in realist evaluation. Implementation Science 2015;10(1):1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackwood, B, O’Halloran, P, Porter, S. On the problems of mixing RCTs with qualitative research: The case of the MRC framework for the evaluation of complex healthcare interventions. Journal of Research in Nursing 2010;15(6):511–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, AJ. Realist evaluation and randomised controlled trials for testing program theory in complex social systems. Evaluation 2016;22(3):270–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaikie, N. Approaches to Social Enquiry. Cambridge: Polity Press 1993.Google Scholar
Comte, A. The Positive Philosophy of Auguste Comte. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2010.Google Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, P. Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press 2010.Google Scholar
Wong, G, Greenhalgh, T, Westhorp, G, et al. RAMESES publication standards: Realist syntheses. BMC Medicine 2013;11:21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pawson, R, Greenhalgh, T, Harvey, G, et al. Realist review – a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy 2005;10:21–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rose, G. The Strategy of Preventive Medicine. Oxford: Oxford University Press 1992.Google Scholar
Campbell, R, Starkey, F, Holliday, J, et al. An informal school-based peer-led intervention for smoking prevention in adolescence (ASSIST): A cluster randomised trial. Lancet 2008;371:1595–602.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oakley, A. Experiments in Knowing: Gender and Method in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Polity Press 2000.Google Scholar
Habicht, JP, Victora CG, Vaughan JP. Evaluation designs for adequacy, plausibility and probability of public health programme performance and impact. International Journal of Epidemiology 1999;28:10–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schreuders, M, Nuyts, PAW, van den Putte, B, et al. Understanding the impact of school tobacco policies on adolescent smoking behaviour: A realist review. Social Science & Medicine 2017;183(19):e27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Defever, E, Jones, M. Rapid realist review of school-based physical activity interventions in 7– to 11–year-old children. Children and Youth Services Review 2021;8:52. https://doi.org/10.3390/children8010052.Google ScholarPubMed
Berg, RC, Nanavati, J. Realist review: Current practice and future prospects. Journal of Research Practice 2016;12:R1. http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/538/449.Google Scholar
Bonell, C, Moore, G, Warren, E, et al. Are randomized controlled trials positivist? Reviewing the social science and philosophy literature to assess positivist tendencies of trials of social interventions in public health and health services. Trials 2018;19:238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, J, Thorogood, N. Qualitative Methods for Health Research. London: SAGE 2004.Google Scholar
Moore, GF, Audrey, S, Barker, M, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. British Medical Journal 2015;350:h1258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Markham, WA, Aveyard, P. A new theory of health promoting schools based on human functioning, school organisation and pedagogic practice. Social Science & Medicine 2003;56(6):1209–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bernstein, B. Class, Codes and Control, Vol. 3: Towards a Theory of Educational Transmission. London: Routledge 1975.Google Scholar
Moher, D, Hopewell, S, Schulz, KF, et al. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. British Medical Journal 2010;340:c869.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olds, DL, Robinson, J, O’Brien, R, et al. Home visiting by paraprofessionals and by nurses: A randomized, controlled trial. Pediatrics 2002;110(3):486–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robling, M, Bekkers, MJ, Bell, K, et al. Effectiveness of a nurse-led intensive home-visitation programme for first-time teenage mothers (building blocks): A pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2016;387(10014):146–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Langford, R, Bonell, CP, Jones, HE, et al. The WHO Health Promoting School framework for improving the health and well-being of students and staff. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014; Issue 1 Art No: CD008958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flay, BR, Graumlich, S, Segawa, E, et al. Effects of 2 prevention programs on high-risk behaviors among African American youth: A randomized trial. Archives Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine 2004;158(4):377–84. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.158.4.377.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weber, M. The Methodology of the Social Sciences. Glencoe, IL: Free Press 1949.Google Scholar
May, C. Towards a general theory of implementation. Implementation Science 2013;8:18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nilsen, P. Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks. Implementation Science 2015;10:53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgan, DL. Practical strategies for combining qualitative and quantitative methods: Applications to health research. Qualitative Health Research 1998;8(3):362–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weiss, C. Nothing as practical as good theory: Exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community initiatives for children and families. In: Connell, JP, ed. New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives Concepts, Methods, and Contexts Roundtable on Comprehensive Community Initiatives for Children and Families. Washington, DC: Aspen Institute 1995:65–92.Google Scholar
Glanz, K, Bishop, D. The role of behavioral science theory in development and implementation of public health interventions. Annual Review of Public Health 2010;31:399–418.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noar, SM, Chabot, M, Zimmerman, RS. Applying health behavior theory to multiple behavior change: Considerations and approaches. Preventive Medicine 2008;46(3):275–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Breuer, E, Lee, L, De Silva, M, et al. Using theory of change to design and evaluate public health interventions: A systematic review. Implementation Science 2016;11(1):63. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0422-6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moore, GF, Evans, RE. What theory, for whom and in which context? Reflections on the application of theory in the development and evaluation of complex population health interventions. Social Science and Medicine Population Health 2017;3:132–35.Google ScholarPubMed
Lemire, S, Kwako, AJ, Nielsen, SB, et al. What is this thing called a mechanism? Findings from a review of published realist evaluations. New Directions for Evaluation 2020;167:73–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connell, JP, Kubisch, AC. Applying a Theory of Change Approach to the Evaluation of Comprehensive Community Initiatives: Progress, Prospects, and Problems. Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute 1998.Google Scholar
Patton, MQ. Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE 2002.Google Scholar
Walton, GM, Yeager, DS. Seed and soil: Psychological affordances in contexts help to explain where wise interventions succeed or fail. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2020;29(3):219–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carey, RN, Connell, LE, Johnston, M, et al. Behavior change techniques and their mechanisms of action: A synthesis of links described in published intervention literature. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 2019;53(8):693–707.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. The Constitution of Society. Cambridge: Polity Press 1984.Google Scholar
Marchal, B, van Belle, S, van Olmen, J, et al. Is realist evaluation keeping its promise? A review of published empirical studies in the field of health systems. Evaluation 2012;18(2):192–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falleti, TG, Lynch, JF. Context and causal mechanisms in political analysis. Comparative Political Studies 2009;42(9):1143–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedstrom, P, Swedberg, R. Social Mechanisms: An Analytical Approach to Social Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Astbury, B, Leeuw, FL. Unpacking black boxes: Mechanisms and theory building in evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation 2010;31(3):363–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sayer, A. Realism and Social Science. London: SAGE 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jansen, YJFM, Foets, MME, de Bont, AA. The contribution of qualitative research to the development of tailor-made community-based interventions in primary care: A review. European Journal of Public Health 2010;20(2):220–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, M, Matka, E, Sullivan, H. Evidence, understanding and complexity: Evaluation in non-linear systems. Evaluation 2003;9:265–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porter, S. The uncritical realism of realist evaluation. Evaluation 2015;21(1):65–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonell, C, Allen, E, Warren, E, et al. Initiating change in the school environment to reduce bullying and aggression: A cluster randomised controlled trial of the Learning Together (LT) intervention in English secondary schools. Lancet 2018;392(10163):2452–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jamal, F, Fletcher, A, Shackleton, A, et al. The three stages of building and testing mid-level theories in a realist RCT: A case-example. Trials 2015;16:466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, R, Bonell, C. Development and evaluation of complex interventions in public health. In: Detels, R, Beaglehole, MA, Lansang, M, et al., eds. Oxford Textbook of Public Health, 7th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2014:751–60.Google Scholar
van Urk, F, Grant, S, Bonell, C. Involving stakeholders in programme theory specification: Discussion of a systematic, consensus-based approach. Evidence & Policy 2016;12(14):541–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nussbaum, MC. Aristotelian social democracy. In: Douglas, RB, Mara, GM, Richardson, H, eds. Liberalism and the Good. London: Routledge 1990:203–51.Google Scholar
Tobler, AL, Komro, KA, Dabroski, A, et al. Preventing the link between SES and high-risk behaviors: ‘Value-added’ education, drug use and delinquency in high-risk, urban schools. Prevention Science 2011;12(2):211–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Markham, WA, Aveyard, P, Bisset, SL, et al. Value-added education and smoking uptake in schools: A cohort study. Addiction 2008;103(1):155–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonell, CP, Parry, W, Wells, H, et al. The effects of the school environment on student health: A systematic review of multi-level studies. Health and Place 2013;21:180–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonell, C, Sorhaindo, A, Allen, E, et al. Pilot multi-method trial of a school-ethos intervention to reduce substance use: Building hypotheses about upstream pathways to prevention. Journal of Adolescent Health 2010;47(6):555–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, L, Glover, S, Godfrey, C, et al. Building capacity for system-level change in schools: Lessons from the Gatehouse project. Health Education and Behavior 2001;28(3):368–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fletcher, A, Jamal, F, Moore, G, et al. Realist complex intervention science: Applying realist principles across all phases of the Medical Research Council framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions. Evaluation 2016;22(3):286–303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pearson, M, Chilton, R, Wyatt, K, et al. Implementing health promotion programmes in schools: A realist systematic review of research and experience in the United Kingdom. Implementation Science 2015;10(1):1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jamal, F, Fletcher, A, Harden, A, et al. The school environment and student health: A systematic review and meta-ethnography of qualitative research. BMC Public Health 2013;13(1):798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popper, K. The Open Society and Its Enemies, Volume 2 Hegel and Marx. London: Routledge 1945.Google Scholar
Buckley, S, Maxwell, GM. Respectful Schools: Restorative Practices in Education: A Summary Report. Wellington: Office of the Children’s Commissioner and the Institute of Policy Studies, School of Government. Victoria, Australia: Victoria University 2007.Google Scholar
Garandeau, CF, Salmivalli, C. Can healthier contexts be harmful? A new perspective on the plight of victims of bullying. Child Development Perspectives 2019;13(3):147–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Unrau, YA. Using client exit interviews to illuminate outcomes in program logic models: A case example. Evaluation and Program Planning 2001;24:353–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glaser, D. Child abuse and neglect and the brain–a review. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 2000;41(1):97–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steckler, L, Linnan, A, eds. Process Evaluation for Public Health Interventions and Research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass 2004.Google Scholar
Michie, S, Van Stralen, MM, West, R. The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implementation Science 2011;6(1):42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoffmann, TC, Glasziou, PP, Boutron, I, et al. Better reporting of interventions: Template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. British Medical Journal 2014;348:g1687.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonell, C, Fletcher, A, Fitzgerald-Yau, N, et al. A pilot randomised controlled trial of the INCLUSIVE intervention for initiating change locally in bullying and aggression through the school environment: Final report. Health Technology Assessment 2015;19(53):1–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonell, C, Allen, E, Warren, E, et al. Initiating change locally in bullying and aggression through the school environment: The INCLUSIVE cluster RCT. Public Health Research 2019;7(18):1–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, E, Opondo, C, Allen, E, et al. Action groups as a participative strategy for leading whole-school health promotion: Results on implementation from the INCLUSIVE trial in English secondary schools. British Education Research Journal 2019;45(5):748–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, E, Melendez-Torres, GJ, Viner, RM, et al. Using qualitative research within a realist trial to build theory about how context and mechanisms interact to generate outcomes: Findings from the INCLUSIVE trial of a whole-school health intervention. Trials 2020;21:774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pawson, R. Theorizing the interview. British Journal of Sociology 1996;47(2):295–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manzano, A. The craft of interviewing in realist evaluation. Evaluation 2016;22(3):342–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schatzman, L. Dimensional analysis: Notes on an alternative approach to the grounding of theory in qualitative research. In: Maines, D, ed. Social Organization and Social Process: Essays in Honor of Anselm Strauss. New York: Aldine 1991:303–14.Google Scholar
Thirsk, LM, Clark, AM. Using qualitative research for complex interventions: The contributions of hermeneutics. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2017;16:1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charmaz, K. Constructing Grounded Theory. New York: SAGE 2014.Google Scholar
Blumer, H. Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall 1969.Google Scholar
Oliver, C. Critical realist grounded theory: A new approach for social work research. British Journal of Social Work 2011;42(2):371–87.Google Scholar
Hoddy, E. Critical realism in empirical research: Employing techniques from grounded theory methodology. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 2018;22:111–24.Google Scholar
Munro, A, Bloor, M. Process evaluation: The new miracle ingredient in public health research? Qualitative Research 2010;10(6):699–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lancaster, GA. Pilot and feasibility studies come of age! Pilot and Feasibility Studies 2015;1(1):1–1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, M, Fitzpatrick, R, Haines, A, et al. Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. British Medical Journal 2000;321:694–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonell, CP, Fletcher, A, Fitzgerald-Yau, N, et al. Initiating change locally in bullying and aggression through the school environment (INCLUSIVE): Pilot randomised controlled trial. Health Technology Assessment 2015;19(53):1–110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Audrey, S, Holliday, J, Parry-Langdon, N, et al. Meeting the challenges of implementing process evaluation within randomized controlled trials: The example of ASSIST (A Stop Smoking in Schools Trial). Health Education Research 2006;21(3):366–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilkinson, R, Pickett, K. The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better. London: Allen Lane 2009.Google Scholar
Marmot, MG. Fair Society, Healthy Lives: The Marmot Review. Strategic Review of Health Inequalities in England post-2010. London: The Marmot Review 2010.Google Scholar
Bonell, C, Fletcher, A, Morton, M, et al. ‘Realist randomised controlled trials’: A new approach to evaluating complex public health interventions. Social Science and Medicine 2012;75(12):2299–306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Warren, E, Melendez-Torres, GJ, Bonell, C. Are realist randomised controlled trials possible? A reflection on the INCLUSIVE evaluation of a whole-school, bullying-prevention intervention. Trials 2022;23(82). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05976-1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tipton, E, Yeager, DS, Iachan, R, et al. Designing Probability Samples to Identify Sources of Treatment Effect Heterogeneity. New York: Wiley 2019:435–56.Google Scholar
Patton, G, Bond, L, Carlin, JB, et al. Promoting social inclusion in schools: Group-randomized trial of effects on student health risk behaviour and well-being. American Journal of Public Health 2006;96(9):1582–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petticrew, M, Tugwell, P, Kristjannsson, E, et al. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t: Subgroup analysis and equity. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2012;66:95–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torgerson, D, Sibbald, B. Understanding controlled trials: What is a patient preference trial? British Medical Journal 1998;316:360.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hussey, MA, Hughes, JP. Design and analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials. Contemporary Clinical Trials 2007;28:182–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonell, C, Hargreaves, J, Cousens, S, et al. Alternatives to randomisation in the evaluation of public-health interventions: Design challenges and solutions. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2011;65(7):582–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cousens, S, Hargreaves, J, Bonell, C, et al. Alternatives to randomisation in the evaluation of public-health interventions: Statistical analysis and causal inference. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2011;65(7):576–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egan, M, Petticrew, M, Ogilvie, D, et al. New roads and human health: A systematic review. American Journal of Public Health 2003;93(9):1463–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hutchinson, P, Wheeler, J. Advanced methods for evaluating the impact of family planning communication programs: Evidence from Tanzania and Nepal. Studies in Family Planning 2006;37(3):169–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonell, C, Dodd, M, Allen, E, et al. Broader impacts of an intervention to transform school environments on student behaviour and school functioning: Post hoc analyses from the INCLUSIVE cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 2020;10(5):e031589.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wigelsworth, M, Thornton, E, Troncoso, P, et al. A Whole-School Approach to Improving Behaviour and Reducing Bullying: An Independent Evaluation of the ‘INCLUSIVE’ Project. London: Education Endowment Foundation 2023.Google Scholar
Williams, J, Miller, S, Cutbush, S, et al. A latent transition model of the effects of a teen dating violence prevention initiative. Journal of Adolescent Health 2015;56:eS32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Melendez-Torres, GJ, Allen, E, Viner, R, et al. Effects of a whole-school health intervention on clustered adolescent health risks: Latent transition analysis of data from the INCLUSIVE trial. Prevention Science 2022;23(1):1–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frazier, PA, Tix, AP, Barron, KE. Testing moderator and mediator effects in counseling psychology research. Journal of Counseling and Psychology 2013;67(2):190–3.Google Scholar
Lorenc, T, Petticrew, M, Welch, V, et al. What types of interventions generate inequalities? Evidence from systematic reviews. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health Online First 2012. http://jechbmjcom/content/early/2012/08/07/jech-2012-201257full.Google Scholar
Murphy, SM, Edwards, RT, Williams, N, et al. An evaluation of the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of the National Exercise Referral Scheme in Wales, UK: A randomised controlled trial of a public health policy initiative. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2012;66(8):745–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turnwald, BP, Bertoldo, JD, Perry, MA, et al. Increasing vegetable intake by emphasizing tasty and enjoyable attributes: A randomized controlled multisite intervention for taste-focused labeling. Psychology Science 2019;30(11):1603–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shackleton, N, Fletcher, A, Jamal, F, et al. A new measure of unhealthy school environments and its implications for critical assessments of health promotion in schools. Critical Public Health 2017;27(2):248–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sawyer, MG, Pfeiffer, S, Spence, SH, et al. School-based prevention of depression: A randomised controlled study of the beyond blue schools research initiative. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 2010;51(2):199–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baron, RM, Kenny, DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986;51:1173–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacKinon, DP, Lockwood, CM, Hoffman, JM, et al. A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods 2002;7:83–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonell, C, Allen, E, Opondo, C, et al. Examining intervention mechanisms of action using mediation analysis within a randomised trial of a whole-school health intervention. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2019;73(5):455–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Littlecott, HJ, Moore, G, Moore, L, et al. Psychosocial mediators of change in physical activity in the Welsh national exercise referral scheme: Secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial. International Journal of Behavior, Nutrition and Physical Activity 2014;11:109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Melendez-Torres, GJ, Warren, E, Viner, R, et al. Moderated mediation analyses to assess intervention mechanisms for impacts on victimisation, psycho-social problems and mental wellbeing: Evidence from the INCLUSIVE realist randomized trial. Social Science and Medicine 2021;279:113984.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Melendez-Torres, GJ, Warren, E, Ukoumunne, O, et al. Locating and testing the healthy context paradox: Examples from the INCLUSIVE trial. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2022;22(1):57. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01537-5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ragin, CC. Turning the tables: How case-oriented research challenges. Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards 2004;123–38.Google Scholar
Ragin, CC. Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press 2009.Google Scholar
Ragin, CC, Becker, HS. What Is a Case? Exploring the Foundations of Social Inquiry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1992.Google Scholar
Rihoux, B, Ragin, CC. Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques. New York: SAGE 2008.Google Scholar
Thomas, J, O’Mara-Eves, A, Brunton, G. Using Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) in systematic reviews of complex interventions: A worked example. Systematic Reviews 2014;3(1):67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, E, Melendez-Torres, GJ, Bonell, C. Using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to explore causal pathways to reduced bullying in a whole-school intervention in a randomized controlled trial. Journal of School Violence 2022;21(4):381–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sager, F, Andereggen, C. Dealing with complex causality in realist synthesis: The promise of qualitative comparative analysis. American Journal of Evaluation 2012;33(1):60–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonell, C, Prost, A, Melendez-Torres, G, et al. Will it work here? A realist approach to local decisions about implementing interventions evaluated as effective elsewhere. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2021;75(1):46–50.Google Scholar
Pawson, R. The Science of Evaluation: A Realist Manifesto. London: SAGE 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Catalano, RF, Berglund, LM, Ryan, JAM, et al. Positive youth development in the United States: Research findings on evaluations of positive youth development programs. Prevention & Treatment 2002;5(1):1–166.Google Scholar
Harden, A, Brunton, G, Fletcher, A, et al. Teenage pregnancy and social disadvantage: A systematic review integrating trials and qualitative studies. British Medical Journal 2009;339:b4254.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirby, D. Emerging Answers: Research Findings on Programs to Reduce Teen Pregnancy. Washington, DC: National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy 2001.Google Scholar
Armstrong, R, Waters, E, Moore, L, et al. Improving the reporting of public health intervention research: Advancing TREND and CONSORT. Journal of Public Health 2008;30(1):103–09.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loxton, D, Dolja-Gore, X, Anderson, AE, et al. Intimate partner violence adversely impacts health over 16 years and across generations: A longitudinal cohort study. PLoS One 2017;12(6):e0178138. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Costa, BM, Kaestle, CE, Walker, A, et al. Longitudinal predictors of domestic violence perpetration and victimization: A systematic review. Aggressive and Violent Behaviour 2015;24:261–72.Google Scholar
Fellmeth, GLT, Heffernan, C, Nurse, J, et al. Educational and skills-based interventions for preventing relationship and dating violence in adolescents and young adults: Cochrane database. Systematic Reviews 2013;Art No. CD004534. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De La Rue, L, Polanin, JR, Espelage, DL, et al. A meta-analysis of school-based interventions aimed to prevent or reduce violence in teen dating relationships. Review of Educational Research 2016;87(1):7–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kettrey, HH, Marx, RA, Tanner-Smith, EE. Effects of bystander programs on the prevention of sexual assault among adolescents and college students: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews 2019;15:e1013.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stanley, N, Ellis, J, Farrelly, N, et al. Preventing domestic abuse for children and young people: A review of school-based interventions. Children and Youth Services Review 2015;59:120–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundgren, R, Amin, A. Addressing intimate partner violence and sexual violence among adolescents: Emerging evidence of effectiveness. Journal of Adolescent Health 2015;56:S42–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munoz-Fernandez, N, Ortega-Rivera, J, Nocentini, A, et al. The efficacy of the ‘Dat-E adolescence’ prevention program in the reduction of dating violence and bullying. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2019;16(3):408. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16030408.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gage, AJ, Honoré, JG, Deleon, J. Pilot Test of a Dating Violence-Prevention Curriculum among High School Students: Emerging Evidence of Effectiveness in a Low-Income Country. 2016. Measure Evaluation. See www.measureevaluation.org/publications/wp-14-149.html.Google Scholar
Devries, KM, Knight, L, Allen, E, et al. Does the good schools toolkit reduce physical, sexual and emotional violence, and injuries, in girls and boys equally? A cluster-randomised controlled trial. Prevention Science 2017;18(7):839–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-017-0775-3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noblit, G, Hare, R. Meta-Ethnography: Synthesizing Qualitative Studies. London: SAGE 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orr, N, Chollet, A, Rizzo, A, et al. School-based interventions for preventing dating and relationship violence and gender-based violence: A systematic review and synthesis of theories of change. Review of Educational Research 2022;10(3):e3382.Google ScholarPubMed
Shepherd, J, Kavanagh, J, Picot, J, et al. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of behavioural interventions for the prevention of sexually transmitted infections in young people aged 13 to 19: A systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technology Assessment Monographs 2010;14(7):1–206.Google Scholar
Herlitz, L, MacIntyre, H, Osborn, T, et al. The sustainability of public health interventions in schools: A systematic review. Implementation Science 2020;15(1):4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tancred, T, Paparini, S, Melendez-Torres, GJ, et al. Interventions integrating health and academic interventions to prevent substance use and violence: A systematic review and synthesis of process evaluations. Systematic Reviews 2018;7:227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonell, C, Dickson, K, Hinds, K, et al. The effects of Positive Youth Development interventions on substance use, violence and inequalities: Systematic review of theories of change, processes and outcomes. Public Health Research 2016;4(5):1–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonell, C, Jamal, F, Harden, A, et al. Systematic review of the effects of schools and school environment interventions on health: Evidence mapping and synthesis. Public Health Research 2013;1(1):1–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tancred, T, Melendez-Torres, GJ, Paparini, S, et al. Interventions integrating health and academic education in schools to prevent substance misuse and violence: Systematic review and evidence synthesis. Public Health Research 2018;7(17):1–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ponsford, R, Melendez-Torres, GJ, Miners, A, et al. Whole-school interventions promoting student commitment to school to prevent substance use and violence and improve educational attainment: A systematic review. Public Health Research 2023;221:190–197.Google Scholar
Meiksin, R, Melendez-Torres, GJ, Miners, A, et al. E-health interventions targeting HIV/STIs, sexual risk, substance use and mental ill-health among men who have sex with men: Systematic review. Public Health Research 2022;10(4):1–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farmer, C, Shaw, N, Rizzo, AJ, et al. School-based interventions to prevent dating and relationship violence and gender-based violence: Systematic review and network meta-analysis. American Journal of Public Health 2023;113(3):320–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wekerle, C, Waechter, RL, Leung, E, et al. Adolescence: A window of opportunity for positive change in mental health. First Peoples Child & Family Review 2007;3(2):8–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jewkes, R, Flood, M, Lang, J. From work with men and boys to changes of social norms and reduction of inequities in gender relations: A conceptual shift in prevention of violence against women and girls. Lancet 2014;104(1):F8–F12. https://doi.org/101016/S0140-6736(14)61683-4.Google Scholar
Dias, S, Caldwell, DMA. Network meta-analysis explained. Archives of Disease in Childhood Fetal and Neonatal Edition 2019;104:F8–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Espelage, DL, Low, S, Polanin, JR, et al. The impact of a middle school program to reduce aggression, victimization, and sexual violence. Journal of Adolescent Health 2013;53(2):180–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.02.021.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thompson, SG. Why sources of heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be investigated. British Medical Journal 1994;309:1351–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenland, S, Robins, J. Ecologic studies-biases, misconceptions, and counterexamples. American Journal of Epidemiology 1994;139:747–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomas, J, O’Mara-Eves, A, Brunton, G. Using Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) in systematic reviews of complex interventions: A worked example. Systematic Reviews 2014;3:67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melendez‐Torres, G, Sutcliffe, K, Burchett, HE, et al. Developing and testing intervention theory by incorporating a views synthesis into a qualitative comparative analysis of intervention effectiveness. Research Synthesis Methods 2019;10(3):389–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kneale, D, Rojas-García, A, Thomas, J. Obstacles and opportunities to using research evidence in local public health decision-making in England. Health Research Policy and Systems 2019;17:61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loren, T, Oliver, K. Adverse effects of public health interventions: A conceptual framework. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2014;68(3):288–90.Google Scholar
Kirke, DM. Chain reactions in adolescents’ cigarette, alcohol and drug use: Similarity through peer influence or the patterning of ties in peer networks? Social Networks 2004;26:3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freedman, B. Equipoise and the ethics of clinical research. New England Journal of Medicine 1987;317:141–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonell, C, Prost, A, Melendez-Torres, GJ, et al. Will it work here? A realist approach to local decisions about implementing interventions evaluated as effective elsewhere. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2021;75(1):46–50.Google Scholar
Evans, R, Murphy, S, Scourfield, J. Implementation of a school-based social and emotional learning intervention: Understanding diffusion processes within complex systems. Prevention Science 2015;16(5):754–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Romasz, TE, Kantor, JH, Elias, MJ. Implementation and evaluation of urban school-wide social–emotional learning programs. Evaluation and Program Planning 2004;27(1):89–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Movsisyan, A, Arnold, L, Evans, R, et al. Adapting evidence-informed complex population health interventions for new contexts: A systematic review of guidance. Implementation Science 2019;14(1):105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munthe-Kaas, H, Nøkleby, H, Lewin, S, et al. The TRANSFER approach for assessing the transferability of systematic review findings. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2020;20(1):11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, KM, Bavarian, N, Snyder, FJ, et al. Direct and mediated effects of a social-emotional and character development program on adolescent substance use. International Journal of Emotional Education 2012;4(1):1–14.Google ScholarPubMed
Durlak, JA, Weissberg, RP, Dymnicki, AB. The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child Development 2011;82(1):405–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldberg, JM, Sklad, M, Elfrink, TR, et al. Effectiveness of interventions adopting a whole school approach to enhancing social and emotional development: A meta-analysis. European Journal of Psychology of Education 2019;34:755–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blewitt, C, Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M, Nolan, A, et al. Social and emotional learning associated with universal curriculum-based interventions in early childhood education and care centers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Network Open 2018;1(8):e185727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belfield, C, Bowden, B, Klapp, A, et al. The economic value of social and emotional learning. New York: Center for Benefit-Cost Studies in Education, Teachers College, Columbia University 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corcoran, RP, Cheung, ACK, Kim, E, et al. Effective universal school-based social and emotional learning programs for improving academic achievement: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 50 years of research. Educational Research Review 2018;25:56–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Escoffery, C, Lebow-Skelley, E, Udelson, H, et al. A scoping study of frameworks for adapting public health evidence-based interventions. Translational Behavioral Medicine 2019;9(1):1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pfadenhauer, LM, Gerhardus, A, Mozygemba, K, et al. Making sense of complexity in context and implementation: The Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions (CICI) framework. Implementation Science 2017;12:21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomson, KC, Richardson, CG, Gadermann, AM, et al. Association of childhood social-emotional functioning profiles at school entry with early-onset mental health conditions. JAMA Network Open 2019;2(1):e186694.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Korteweg, HA, van Bokhoven, I, Yzermans, C, et al. Rapid health and needs assessments after disasters: A systematic review. BMC Public Health 2010;10:295.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aarons, GA, Sklar, M, Mustanski, B, et al. Scaling-out evidence-based interventions to new populations or new health care delivery systems. Implementation Science 2017;12(1):111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hargreaves, J, Hatcher, A, Strange, V, et al. Process evaluation of the Intervention with Microfinance for AIDS and Gender Equity (IMAGE) in rural South Africa. Health Education Research 2009;25(1):27–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Durlak, JA, DuPre, EP. Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology 2008;41:327–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. The Use of Evidence in Decision-Making during Public Health Emergencies: Report on an Expert Workshop. Stockholm: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control 2019.Google Scholar
Warsame, A, Blanchet, K, Checchi, F. Towards systematic evaluation of epidemic responses during humanitarian crises: A scoping review of existing public health evaluation frameworks. BMJ Global Health 2020;5:e002109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Diderichsen, F, Evans, T, Whitehead, M. The social basis of disparities in health. In: Evans, T, Whitehead, M, Diderichsen, F, et al., eds. Challenging Inequities in Health. New York: Oxford University Press 2001:12–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonell, C, Jamal, F, Melendez-Torres, GJ, et al. ‘Dark logic’ – theorising the harmful consequences of public health interventions. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2015;69(1):95–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matuchansky, C. The promise of personalised medicine. Lancet 2015;386(9995):742.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. School-based interventions to prevent smoking (Quick reference guide). London: NICE 2010.Google Scholar
Bonell, C, Ponsford, R, Meiksin, R, et al. Testing and refining middle-range theory in evaluations of public-health interventions: Evidence from recent systematic reviews and trials. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2023;77(3):147–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Starkey, F, Audrey, S, Holliday, J, et al. Identifying influential young people to undertake effective peer-led health promotion: The example of A Stop Smoking In Schools Trial (ASSIST). Health Education Research 2009;24(6):977–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rogers, EM. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: The Free Press 1962.Google Scholar
Lunn, P, Belton, C, Lavin, C, et al. Using behavioural science to help fight the Coronavirus. Economic and Social Research Institute 2020. www.esri.ie/publications/using-behavioural-science-to-help-fight-the-coronavirus.Google Scholar
Bonell, C, Michie, S, Reicher, S, et al. Harnessing behavioural science in public health campaigns to maintain ‘social distancing’ in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: Key principles. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2020;74(8):617–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drury, J, Carter, H, Cocking, C, et al. Facilitating collective resilience in the public in emergencies: Twelve recommendations based on the social identity approach. Frontiers in Public Health 2019;7(14):141.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haslam, SA, Reicher, SD, Platow, M. The New Psychology of Leadership. London: Routledge 2020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haidt, J. The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided By Politics and Religion. New York: Pantheon 2012.Google Scholar
Everett, J, Colombatto, C, Chituc, C, et al. The effectiveness of moral messages on public health behavioral intentions during the COVID-19 pandemic. PsyArXiv 2020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shen, L. Targeting smokers with empathy appeal antismoking public service announcements: A field experiment. Journal of Health Communication 2015;20:573–80. https://doi.org/101080/1081073020151012236.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Popper, K. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul 1959.Google Scholar
Weiss, CH. How can theory-based evaluation make greater headway? Evaluation Review 1997;21:501–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davey, C, Hassan, S, Cartwright, N, et al. Designing Evaluations to Provide Evidence to Inform Action in New Settings. London: Department for International Development 2019.Google Scholar
Carpenter, K, Stoner, S, Mikko, A, et al. Efficacy of a web-based intervention to reduce sexual risk in men who have sex with men. AIDS Behavior 2010;14(3):549–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-009-9578-2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fisher, J, Fisher, W, Misovich, S, et al. Changing AIDS risk behavior: Effects of an intervention emphasizing AIDS risk reduction information, motivation, and behavioral skills in a college student population. Health Psychology Review 1996;15:114–23.Google Scholar
Miller, WR, Rollnick, S. Motivational Interviewing: Preparing People to Change. New York: Guilford Press 2002.Google Scholar
Reback, C, Fletcher, J, Swendeman, D, et al. Theory‑based text‑messaging to reduce methamphetamine use and HIV sexual risk behaviors among men who have sex with men: Automated unidirectional delivery outperforms bidirectional peer interactive delivery. AIDS and Behavior 2019;23(1):37–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-018-2225-z.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bandura, A. Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology 2001;52:1–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Becker, MH. The health belief model: A decade later. Health Education & Behavior 1984;11(1):1–47. https://doi.org/101177/1090198111418108.Google Scholar
Melendez-Torres, GJ, Meiksin, R, Witzel, TC, et al. eHealth interventions to address HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, sexual risk behavior, substance use, and mental ill-health in men who have sex with men: Systematic review and meta-analysis. JMIR Public Health Surveillance 2022;8(4):e27061.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Melendez-Torres, GJ, Orr, N, Farmer, C, et al. School-based interventions To Prevent Dating and Relationship Violence and Gender-Based Violence (STOP-DRV-GBV): systematic review to understand characteristics, mechanisms, implementation and effectiveness. Public Health Research (in press).Google Scholar
Ponsford, R, Falconer, J, Melendez-Torres, GJ, et al. Whole-school interventions promoting student commitment to school to prevent substance use and violence: Synthesis of theories of change. Health Education (Online first) 2022. https://doi.org/101177/00178969221100892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cross, D, Barnes, A, Cardoso, P, et al. Cyber-friendly schools. In Campbell, M, Bauman, S, eds. Reducing Cyberbullying in Schools: International Evidence-Based Best Practices. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press 2018:95–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bronfenbrenner, U. The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 1979.Google Scholar
Boudon, R. What middle-range theories are. Contemporary Sociology 1991;20(4):519–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
lasuutari, P. Theorizing in qualitative research: A cultural studies perspective. Qualitative Inquiry 1996;2(4):371–84.Google Scholar
Turner, JH. Must sociological theory and sociological practice be so far apart? Sociological Perspectives 1998;41(2):243–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • References
  • Chris Bonell, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, G. J. Melendez-Torres, University of Exeter, Emily Warren, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
  • Book: Realist Trials and Systematic Reviews
  • Online publication: 08 February 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009456616.012
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • References
  • Chris Bonell, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, G. J. Melendez-Torres, University of Exeter, Emily Warren, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
  • Book: Realist Trials and Systematic Reviews
  • Online publication: 08 February 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009456616.012
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • References
  • Chris Bonell, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, G. J. Melendez-Torres, University of Exeter, Emily Warren, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
  • Book: Realist Trials and Systematic Reviews
  • Online publication: 08 February 2024
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009456616.012
Available formats
×