Trying to do more good than harm in policy and practice: The role of rigorous, transparent up-to-date evaluations
Trying to do more good than harm in policy and practice: The role of rigorous, transparent up-to-date evaluations
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/0002716203254762
复制
发表时间：
2003-09-01
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
Chalmers, I
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Chalmers, I
由于专业人士在干预他人生活时，有时弊大于利，因此他们的政策和做法应以严格、透明、最新的评估为依据。调查往往揭示出实践和政策干预的类型和频率存在很大差异，这种集体不确定性的证据应促使人们保持谦逊，这是进行严格评价的先决条件。评价应首先系统地评价尽可能高比例的现有有关的、可靠的研究，然后在适当情况下进行进一步的研究。系统的、最新的研究综述——比如Cochrane和Campbell合作组织努力准备和维护的那些——旨在最大限度地减少干预措施的效果被混淆的可能性，从业者可以选择是否希望他们的政策和实践得到研究的信息，如果是这样的话，他们可以选择如何选择。然而，他们应该清楚，别人的生活往往会受到他们判断的有效性的影响。
Because professionals sometimes do more harm than good when they intervene in the lives of other people, their policies and practices should be informed by rigorous, transparent, up-to-date evaluations. Surveys often reveal wide variations in the type and frequency of practice and policy interventions, and this evidence of collective uncertainty should prompt the humility that is a precondition for rigorous evaluation. Evaluation should begin with systematic assessment of as high a proportion as possible of existing relevant, reliable research, and then, if appropriate, additional research. Systematic, up-to-date reviews of research-such as those that the Cochrane and Campbell Collaborations endeavor to prepare and maintain-are designed to minimize the likelihood that the effects of interventions will be confused w and practitioners can choose whether, and if so how, they wish their policies an practices to be informed by research. They should be clear, however, that the lives of other people will often be affected by the validity of their judgements.