Moving beyond randomized controlled trials in the evaluation of compulsory community treatment

Compulsory community treatment for people with severe mental illness remains controversial due to conflicting research evidence. Recently, there have been challenges to the conventional view that trial‐based evidence should take precedence. This paper adds to these challenges in three ways. First, i...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of evaluation in clinical practice 2020-06, Vol.26 (3), p.812-818
Main Authors: Duncan, Craig, Weich, Scott, Moon, Graham, Twigg, Liz, Fenton, Sarah‐Jane, Bhui, Kamaldeep, Canaway, Alastair, Crepaz‐Keay, David, Keown, Patrick, Madan, Jason, McBride, Orla, Parsons, Helen, Singh, Swaran
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
clinical effectiveness
Clinical trials
compulsory community treatment
Health care policy
Medical research
Mental health
Mental health care
mental health policy
Patients rights
randomized controlled trials
realist evaluation
Research methodology
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Compulsory community treatment for people with severe mental illness remains controversial due to conflicting research evidence. Recently, there have been challenges to the conventional view that trial‐based evidence should take precedence. This paper adds to these challenges in three ways. First, it emphasizes the need for critiques of trials to engage with conceptual and not just technical issues. Second, it develops a critique of trials centred on both how we can have knowledge and what it is we can have knowledge of. Third, it uses this critique to develop a research strategy that capitalizes on the information in large‐scale datasets.
ISSN:1356-1294
1365-2753
DOI:10.1111/jep.13245