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 inJournal of evaluation in clinical practice Vol. 26; no. 3; pp. 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 Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published England Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.06.2020
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
clinical effectiveness
compulsory community treatment
mental health policy
randomized controlled trials
realist evaluation
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
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