scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Graham Moore

Bio: Graham Moore is an academic researcher from Cardiff University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Psychological intervention & Mental health. The author has an hindex of 38, co-authored 138 publications receiving 6771 citations.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
19 Mar 2015-BMJ
TL;DR: New MRC guidance provides a framework for conducting and reporting process evaluation studies that will help improve the quality of decision-making in the design and testing of complex interventions.
Abstract: Process evaluation is an essential part of designing and testing complex interventions. New MRC guidance provides a framework for conducting and reporting process evaluation studies

3,662 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article identifies some key areas in which this framework of intervention science might be reconceptualized, and a number of priority areas where further development is needed if alignment with a systems perspective is to be achieved.
Abstract: Complex systems approaches to social intervention research are increasingly advocated. However, there have been few attempts to consider how models of intervention science, such as the Medical Research Council (MRC) complex interventions framework, might be re-framed through a complex systems lens. This paper identifies some key areas in which this framework might be reconceptualised, and a number of priority areas where further development is needed if alignment with a systems perspective is to be achieved. We argue that a complex systems perspective broadens the parameters of ‘relevant’ evidence and theory for intervention development, before discussing challenges in defining feasibility in dynamic terms. We argue that whole systems evaluations may be neither attainable, nor necessary; acknowledgment of complexity does not mean that evaluations must be complex, or investigate all facets of complexity. However, a systems lens may add value to evaluation design through guiding identification of key uncertainties, and informing decisions such as timings of follow-up assessments.

265 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Current Medical Research Council (MRC) Population Health Sciences Research Network (PHSRN) funded work to develop guidance for process evaluations of complex public health interventions is described.
Abstract: Public health interventions aim to improve the health of populations or at-risk subgroups. Problems targeted by such interventions, such as diet and smoking, involve complex multifactorial aetiology. Interventions will often aim to address more than one cause simultaneously, targeting factors at multiple levels (eg, individual, interpersonal, organisational), and comprising several components which interact to affect more than one outcome.1 They will often be delivered in systems which respond in unpredictable ways to the new intervention.2 Recognition is growing that evaluations need to understand this complexity if they are to inform future intervention development, or efforts to apply the same intervention in another setting or population.1 Achieving this will require evaluators to move beyond a ‘does it work?’ focus, towards combining outcomes and process evaluation. There is no such thing as a typical process evaluation, with the term applied to studies which range from a few simple quantitative items on satisfaction, to complex mixed-method studies exploring issues such as the process of implementation, or contextual influences on implementation and outcomes. As recognised within MRC guidance for evaluating complex interventions, process evaluation may be used to ‘assess fidelity and quality of implementation, clarify causal mechanisms and identify contextual factors associated with variation in outcomes’.1 This paper briefly discusses each of these core aims for process evaluation, before describing current Medical Research Council (MRC) Population Health Sciences Research Network (PHSRN) funded work to develop guidance for process evaluations of complex public health interventions.

247 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This guidance may help researchers to consider the full range of contributions that qualitative research can make in relation to their particular trial and may also help researchers and others to reflect on the utility of such qualitative research in practice.
Abstract: Feasibility studies are increasingly undertaken in preparation for randomised controlled trials in order to explore uncertainties and enable trialists to optimise the intervention or the conduct of the trial. Qualitative research can be used to examine and address key uncertainties prior to a full trial. We present guidance that researchers, research funders and reviewers may wish to consider when assessing or undertaking qualitative research within feasibility studies for randomised controlled trials. The guidance consists of 16 items within five domains: research questions, data collection, analysis, teamwork and reporting. Appropriate and well conducted qualitative research can make an important contribution to feasibility studies for randomised controlled trials. This guidance may help researchers to consider the full range of contributions that qualitative research can make in relation to their particular trial. The guidance may also help researchers and others to reflect on the utility of such qualitative research in practice, so that trial teams can decide when and how best to use these approaches in future studies.

214 citations

13 May 2016
Abstract: Table of contentsKEYNOTE PRESENTATIONSK1 Researching complex interventions: the need for robust approachesPeter CraigK2 Complex intervention studies: an important step in developing knowledge for practiceIngalill Rahm-HallbergK3 Public and patient involvement in research: what, why and how?Nicky BrittenK4 Mixed methods in health service research – where do we go from here?Gunilla BorglinSPEAKER PRESENTATIONSS1 Exploring complexity in systematic reviews of complex interventionsGabriele Meyer, Sascha Köpke, Jane Noyes, Jackie ChandlerS2 Can complex health interventions be optimised before moving to a definitive RCT? Strategies and methods currently in useSara LevatiS3 A systematic approach to develop theory based implementation interventionsAnne SalesS4 Pilot studies and feasibility studies for complex interventions: an introductionLehana Thabane, Lora GiangregorioS5 What can be done to pilot complex interventions?Nancy Feeley, Sylvie CossetteS6 Using feasibility and pilot trials to test alternative methodologies and methodological procedures prior to full scale trialsRod TaylorS7 A mixed methods feasibility study in practiceJacqueline Hill, David A Richards, Willem KuykenS8 Non-standard experimental designs and preference designsLouise von EssenS9 Evaluation gone wild: using natural experimental approaches to evaluate complex interventionsAndrew WilliamsS10 The stepped wedge cluster randomised trial: an opportunity to increase the quality of evaluations of service delivery and public policy interventionsKarla Hemming, Richard Lilford, Alan Girling, Monica TaljaardS11 Adaptive designs in confirmatory clinical trials: opportunities in investigating complex interventionsMunyaradzi DimairoS12 Processes, contexts and outcomes in complex interventions, and the implications for evaluationMark PetticrewS13 Processes, contexts and outcomes in complex interventions, and the implications for evaluationJanis Baird, Graham MooreS14 Qualitative evaluation alongside RCTs: what to consider to get relevant and valuable resultsWillem Odendaal, Salla Atkins, Elizabeth Lutge, Natalie Leon, Simon LewinS15 Using economic evaluations to understand the value of complex interventions: when maximising health status is not sufficientKatherine PayneS16 How to arrive at an implementation planTheo van AchterbergS17 Modelling process and outcomes in complex interventionsWalter SermeusS18 Systems modelling for improving health careMartin Pitt, Thomas Monks

184 citations


Cited by
More filters
Book
23 Sep 2019
TL;DR: The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions is the official document that describes in detail the process of preparing and maintaining Cochrane systematic reviews on the effects of healthcare interventions.
Abstract: The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions is the official document that describes in detail the process of preparing and maintaining Cochrane systematic reviews on the effects of healthcare interventions.

21,235 citations

Journal Article

5,680 citations

Journal Article

4,293 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
19 Mar 2015-BMJ
TL;DR: New MRC guidance provides a framework for conducting and reporting process evaluation studies that will help improve the quality of decision-making in the design and testing of complex interventions.
Abstract: Process evaluation is an essential part of designing and testing complex interventions. New MRC guidance provides a framework for conducting and reporting process evaluation studies

3,662 citations