↓ Skip to main content

Quasi experimental designs in pharmacist intervention research

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
Title
Quasi experimental designs in pharmacist intervention research
Published in
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11096-016-0256-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ines Krass

Abstract

Background In the field of pharmacist intervention research it is often difficult to conform to the rigorous requirements of the "true experimental" models, especially the requirement of randomization. When randomization is not feasible, a practice based researcher can choose from a range of "quasi-experimental designs" i.e., non-randomised and at time non controlled. Objective The aim of this article was to provide an overview of quasi-experimental designs, discuss their strengths and weaknesses and to investigate their application in pharmacist intervention research over the previous decade. Results In the literature quasi experimental studies may be classified into five broad categories: quasi-experimental design without control groups; quasi-experimental design that use control groups with no pre-test; quasi-experimental design that use control groups and pre-tests; interrupted time series and stepped wedge designs. Quasi-experimental study design has consistently featured in the evolution of pharmacist intervention research. The most commonly applied of all quasi experimental designs in the practice based research literature are the one group pre-post-test design and the non-equivalent control group design i.e., (untreated control group with dependent pre-tests and post-tests) and have been used to test the impact of pharmacist interventions in general medications management as well as in specific disease states. Conclusion Quasi experimental studies have a role to play as proof of concept, in the pilot phases of interventions when testing different intervention components, especially in complex interventions. They serve to develop an understanding of possible intervention effects: while in isolation they yield weak evidence of clinical efficacy, taken collectively, they help build a body of evidence in support of the value of pharmacist interventions across different practice settings and countries. However, when a traditional RCT is not feasible for logistical and/or ethical reasons researchers should endeavour to use the more robust of the quasi experimental designs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Unknown 93 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Student > Bachelor 5 5%
Researcher 4 4%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 32 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 19%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 12 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 9%
Psychology 4 4%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 40 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 February 2016.
All research outputs
#6,163,150
of 23,340,595 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#313
of 1,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,843
of 398,817 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#6
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,340,595 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,123 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 398,817 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.