↓ Skip to main content

Theory of Change: a theory-driven approach to enhance the Medical Research Council's framework for complex interventions

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
3 policy sources
twitter
17 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
422 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
924 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Theory of Change: a theory-driven approach to enhance the Medical Research Council's framework for complex interventions
Published in
Trials, July 2014
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-15-267
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mary J De Silva, Erica Breuer, Lucy Lee, Laura Asher, Neerja Chowdhary, Crick Lund, Vikram Patel

Abstract

The Medical Research Councils' framework for complex interventions has been criticized for not including theory-driven approaches to evaluation. Although the framework does include broad guidance on the use of theory, it contains little practical guidance for implementers and there have been calls to develop a more comprehensive approach. A prospective, theory-driven process of intervention design and evaluation is required to develop complex healthcare interventions which are more likely to be effective, sustainable and scalable.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 924 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Sierra Leone 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 914 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 175 19%
Researcher 144 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 141 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 50 5%
Other 39 4%
Other 163 18%
Unknown 212 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 172 19%
Social Sciences 135 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 102 11%
Psychology 84 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 25 3%
Other 146 16%
Unknown 260 28%