Editing Randomized controlled trial (section)

== In social science ==

Due to the recent emergence of RCTs in social science, the use of RCTs in social sciences is a contested issue.  Some writers from a medical or health background have argued that existing research in a range of social science disciplines lacks rigour, and should be improved by greater use of randomized control trials.<ref>{{Cite journal |vauthors=Deaton A, Cartwright N |date=August 2018 |title=Understanding and misunderstanding randomized controlled trials |journal=Social Science & Medicine |series=Randomized Controlled Trials and Evidence-based Policy: A Multidisciplinary Dialogue |volume=210 |pages=2–21 |doi=10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.12.005 |pmc=6019115 |pmid=29331519}}</ref>

=== Transport science ===

Researchers in transport science argue that public spending on programmes such as school travel plans could not be justified unless their efficacy is demonstrated by randomized controlled trials.<ref name="Rowland et al (2003)">{{Cite journal |vauthors=Rowland D, DiGuiseppi C, Gross M, Afolabi E, Roberts I |date=January 2003 |title=Randomised controlled trial of site specific advice on school travel patterns |journal=Archives of Disease in Childhood |volume=88 |issue=1 |pages=8–11 |doi=10.1136/adc.88.1.8 |pmc=1719287 |pmid=12495948}}</ref>  Graham-Rowe and colleagues<ref name="Graham-Rowe et al (2011)">{{Cite journal |vauthors=Graham-Rowe E, Skippon S, Gardner B, Abraham C |year=2011 |title=Can we reduce car use and, if so, how? A review of available evidence. |journal=Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice |volume=44 |issue=5 |pages=401–418 |bibcode=2011TRPA...45..401G |doi=10.1016/j.tra.2011.02.001}}</ref>  reviewed 77 evaluations of transport interventions found in the literature, categorising them into 5 "quality levels".  They concluded that most of the studies were of low quality and advocated the use of randomized controlled trials wherever possible in future transport research.

Dr. Steve Melia<ref name="Melia 2011">{{Cite journal |vauthors=Melia S |date=2011 |title=Do Randomised Control Trials Offer a Solution to 'low Quality' Transport Research?' |url=http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/16117/ |journal=Transportation Research Part A |location=Bristol |publisher=University of the West of England}}</ref> took issue with these conclusions, arguing that claims about the advantages of RCTs, in establishing causality and avoiding bias, have been exaggerated.  He proposed the following eight criteria for the use of RCTs in contexts where interventions must change human behaviour to be effective:

The intervention:

# Has not been applied to all members of a unique group of people (e.g. the population of a whole country, all employees of a unique organisation etc.)
# Is applied in a context or setting similar to that which applies to the control group
# Can be isolated from other activities—and the purpose of the study is to assess this isolated effect
# Has a short timescale between its implementation and maturity of its effects

And the causal mechanisms:

# <li value="5">Are either known to the researchers, or else all possible alternatives can be tested
# Do not involve significant feedback mechanisms between the intervention group and external environments
# Have a stable and predictable relationship to exogenous factors
# Would act in the same way if the control group and intervention group were reversed

=== Criminology ===
A 2005 review found 83 randomized experiments in criminology published in 1982–2004, compared with only 35 published in 1957–1981.<ref name="Farrington-2005">{{Cite journal |vauthors=Farrington DP, Welsh BC |year=2005 |title=Randomized experiments in criminology: What have we learned in the last two decades? |journal=[[Journal of Experimental Criminology]] |volume=1 |issue=1 |pages=9–38 |doi=10.1007/s11292-004-6460-0 |s2cid=145758503}}</ref> The authors classified the studies they found into five categories: "policing", "prevention", "corrections", "court", and "community".<ref name="Farrington-2005" />  Focusing only on offending behavior programs, Hollin (2008) argued that RCTs may be difficult to implement (e.g., if an RCT required "passing sentences that would randomly assign offenders to programmes") and therefore that experiments with [[quasi-experimental design]] are still necessary.<ref>{{Cite journal |vauthors=Hollin CR |year=2008 |title=Evaluating offending behaviour programmes: does only randomization glister? |journal=[[Criminology and Criminal Justice]] |volume=8 |issue=1 |pages=89–106 |doi=10.1177/1748895807085871 |s2cid=141222135}}</ref>

=== Education ===
RCTs have been used in evaluating a number of educational interventions. Between 1980 and 2016, over 1,000 reports of RCTs have been published.<ref>{{Cite journal |vauthors=Connolly P, Keenan C, Urbanska K |date=2018-07-09 |title=The trials of evidence-based practice in education: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials in education research 1980–2016 |url=https://pure.qub.ac.uk/portal/en/publications/the-trials-of-evidencebased-practice-in-education-a-systematic-review-of-randomised-controlled-trials-in-education-research-19802016(34e5d239-e91a-4807-96eb-a926022cbb14).html |journal=Educational Research |language=en |volume=60 |issue=3 |pages=276–291 |doi=10.1080/00131881.2018.1493353 |issn=0013-1881 |doi-access=free}}</ref> For example, a 2009 study randomized 260 elementary school teachers' classrooms to receive or not receive a program of behavioral screening, classroom intervention, and parent training, and then measured the behavioral and academic performance of their students.<ref>{{Cite journal |vauthors=Walker HM, Seeley JR, Small J, Severson HH, Graham BA, Feil EG, Serna L, Golly AM, Forness SR |year=2009 |title=A randomized controlled trial of the First Step to Success early intervention. Demonstration of program efficacy outcomes in a diverse, urban school district |journal=[[Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders]] |volume=17 |issue=4 |pages=197–212 |doi=10.1177/1063426609341645 |s2cid=144571336}}</ref> Another 2009 study randomized classrooms for 678 first-grade children to receive a classroom-centered intervention, a parent-centered intervention, or no intervention, and then followed their academic outcomes through age 19.<ref>{{Cite journal |vauthors=Bradshaw CP, Zmuda JH, Kellam SG, Ialongo NS |date=November 2009 |title=Longitudinal Impact of Two Universal Preventive Interventions in First Grade on Educational Outcomes in High School |journal=Journal of Educational Psychology |volume=101 |issue=4 |pages=926–937 |doi=10.1037/a0016586 |pmc=3678772 |pmid=23766545}}</ref>