Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
Niidae Wiki
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Randomized controlled trial
(section)
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== 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
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Niidae Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Encyclopedia:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
Randomized controlled trial
(section)
Add topic