Introduction and interpretation of process evaluation of complex interventions: medical research council guidance_Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Authors：

CHU Hongling ¹ , ZENG Lin ¹ ,  ZHAO Yiming ¹ ,  LI Fengwei ²

1. Research Center of Clinical Epidemiology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, P.R.China;
2. Department of Thoracic Surgery, Beijing Aerospace General Hospital, Beijing 100074, P.R.China;

Corresponding author：

ZHAO Yiming, Email: yimingzhao115@163.com; LI Fengwei, Email: 254103852@qq.com

Keywords：

Complex interventions; Process evaluation; Guideline

DOI：

10.7507/1672-2531.202007060

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

The application of complex interventions in the area of public health, clinical research and education is becoming increasingly widespread. The effectiveness of complex interventions may be affected by numerous factors due to the complexity of interventions, intervention pathways or the context of implementation. Therefore, it is significantly important to evaluate the process of complex interventions, which will provide information to understand the implementation of interventions. The British Medical Research Council’s process evaluation guidelines provide a framework for implementing and reporting on process evaluation research. This paper aims to interpret the guide in detail on complex intervention and process evaluation for the references of domestic researchers.

Citation： CHU Hongling, ZENG Lin, ZHAO Yiming, LI Fengwei. Introduction and interpretation of process evaluation of complex interventions: medical research council guidance. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2020, 20(11): 1353-1358. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.202007060 Copy

1.	Kelly MP, Noyes J, Kane RL, et al. AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 2: defining complexity, formulating scope, and questions. J Clin Epidemiol, 2017, 90: 11-18.
2.	Guise JM, Chang C, Butler M, et al. AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 1: an introduction to a series of articles that provide guidance and tools for reviews of complex interventions. J Clin Epidemiol, 2017, 90: 6-10.
3.	Butler M, Epstein RA, Totten A, et al. AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 3: adapting frameworks to develop protocols. J Clin Epidemiol, 2017, 90: 19-27.
4.	Viswanathan M, McPheeters ML, Murad MH, et al. AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 4: selecting analytic approaches. J Clin Epidemiol, 2017, 90: 28-36.
5.	Pigott T, Noyes J, Umscheid CA, et al. AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 5: advanced analytic methods. J Clin Epidemiol, 2017, 90: 37-42.
6.	Guise JM, Butler ME, Chang C, et al. AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 6: PRISMA-CI extension statement and checklist. J Clin Epidemiol, 2017, 90: 43-50.
7.	Guise JM, Butler M, Chang C, et al. AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 7: PRISMA-CI elaboration and explanation. J Clin Epidemiol, 2017, 90: 51-58.
8.	张格, 王巍巍, 杨智荣, 等. AHRQ 对于复杂干预系统综述报告的 PRISMA-CI 声明及其实例解读. 中华流行病学杂志, 2019, 40(7): 832-838.
9.	田金徽, 马文娟, 苟铃珠, 等. 如何规范报告复杂干预性系统评价和 Meta 分析: PRISMA-CI 解读. 中国药物评价, 2018, 35(1): 62-65.
10.	褚红玲, 石岩岩, 陶立元, 等. 复杂干预研究的过程评价简介. 中华儿科杂志, 2019, 57(9): 659.
11.	Morris RL, Hill KD, Ackerman IN, et al. A mixed methods process evaluation of a person-centred falls prevention program. BMC Health Serv Res, 2019, 19(1): 906.
12.	Liu H, Lindley R, Alim M, et al. Family-led rehabilitation in India (ATTEND)-Findings from the process evaluation of a randomized controlled trial. Int J Stroke, 2019, 14(1): 53-60.
13.	Parker AM, Malik A, Hosey M. Process evaluation and the development of behavioural interventions to improve psychological distress among survivors of critical illness. Thorax, 2019, 74(1): 7-10.
14.	Sorensen JL, Llamas JD. Process evaluation of a community Outpatient Program Treating Substance Use Disorders. J Community Psychol, 2018, 46(7): 844-855.
15.	Kuliukas L, Hauck YL, Jorgensen A, et al. Process evaluation of a peer-led antenatal breastfeeding class for fathers: perceptions of facilitators and participants. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 2019, 19(1): 48.
16.	Trieu K, Webster J, Jan S, et al. Process evaluation of Samoa’s national salt reduction strategy (MASIMA): what interventions can be successfully replicated in lower-income countries? Implement Sci, 2018, 13(1): 107.
17.	Gaugler JE, Reese M, Mittelman MS. Process evaluation of the NYU caregiver intervention-adult child. Gerontologist, 2018, 58(2): e107-e117.
18.	Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, et al. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. Int J Nurs Stud, 2013, 50(5): 587-592.
19.	Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ, 2015, 350: h1258.
20.	Jacobs C, Michelo C, Moshabela M. Implementation of a community-based intervention in the most rural and remote districts of Zambia: a process evaluation of safe motherhood action groups. Implement Sci, 2018, 13(1): 74.
21.	褚红玲, 曾琳, 李楠, 等. 定性研究方法在临床研究设计与实施中的应用. 中华医学杂志, 2016, 96(42): 3427-3429.
22.	褚红玲, 李楠, 曾琳, 等. 混合方法研究及其在临床研究中的应用. 中华医学杂志, 2017, 97(12): 950-953.
23.	褚红玲, 倪凯文, 曾琳, 等. 混合方法研究在真实世界研究中的应用. 中国循证医学杂志, 2018, 18(11): 1203-1206.

1. Kelly MP, Noyes J, Kane RL, et al. AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 2: defining complexity, formulating scope, and questions. J Clin Epidemiol, 2017, 90: 11-18.
2. Guise JM, Chang C, Butler M, et al. AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 1: an introduction to a series of articles that provide guidance and tools for reviews of complex interventions. J Clin Epidemiol, 2017, 90: 6-10.
3. Butler M, Epstein RA, Totten A, et al. AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 3: adapting frameworks to develop protocols. J Clin Epidemiol, 2017, 90: 19-27.
4. Viswanathan M, McPheeters ML, Murad MH, et al. AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 4: selecting analytic approaches. J Clin Epidemiol, 2017, 90: 28-36.
5. Pigott T, Noyes J, Umscheid CA, et al. AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 5: advanced analytic methods. J Clin Epidemiol, 2017, 90: 37-42.
6. Guise JM, Butler ME, Chang C, et al. AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 6: PRISMA-CI extension statement and checklist. J Clin Epidemiol, 2017, 90: 43-50.
7. Guise JM, Butler M, Chang C, et al. AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 7: PRISMA-CI elaboration and explanation. J Clin Epidemiol, 2017, 90: 51-58.
8. 张格, 王巍巍, 杨智荣, 等. AHRQ 对于复杂干预系统综述报告的 PRISMA-CI 声明及其实例解读. 中华流行病学杂志, 2019, 40(7): 832-838.
9. 田金徽, 马文娟, 苟铃珠, 等. 如何规范报告复杂干预性系统评价和 Meta 分析: PRISMA-CI 解读. 中国药物评价, 2018, 35(1): 62-65.
10. 褚红玲, 石岩岩, 陶立元, 等. 复杂干预研究的过程评价简介. 中华儿科杂志, 2019, 57(9): 659.
11. Morris RL, Hill KD, Ackerman IN, et al. A mixed methods process evaluation of a person-centred falls prevention program. BMC Health Serv Res, 2019, 19(1): 906.
12. Liu H, Lindley R, Alim M, et al. Family-led rehabilitation in India (ATTEND)-Findings from the process evaluation of a randomized controlled trial. Int J Stroke, 2019, 14(1): 53-60.
13. Parker AM, Malik A, Hosey M. Process evaluation and the development of behavioural interventions to improve psychological distress among survivors of critical illness. Thorax, 2019, 74(1): 7-10.
14. Sorensen JL, Llamas JD. Process evaluation of a community Outpatient Program Treating Substance Use Disorders. J Community Psychol, 2018, 46(7): 844-855.
15. Kuliukas L, Hauck YL, Jorgensen A, et al. Process evaluation of a peer-led antenatal breastfeeding class for fathers: perceptions of facilitators and participants. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 2019, 19(1): 48.
16. Trieu K, Webster J, Jan S, et al. Process evaluation of Samoa’s national salt reduction strategy (MASIMA): what interventions can be successfully replicated in lower-income countries? Implement Sci, 2018, 13(1): 107.
17. Gaugler JE, Reese M, Mittelman MS. Process evaluation of the NYU caregiver intervention-adult child. Gerontologist, 2018, 58(2): e107-e117.
18. Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, et al. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. Int J Nurs Stud, 2013, 50(5): 587-592.
19. Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ, 2015, 350: h1258.
20. Jacobs C, Michelo C, Moshabela M. Implementation of a community-based intervention in the most rural and remote districts of Zambia: a process evaluation of safe motherhood action groups. Implement Sci, 2018, 13(1): 74.
21. 褚红玲, 曾琳, 李楠, 等. 定性研究方法在临床研究设计与实施中的应用. 中华医学杂志, 2016, 96(42): 3427-3429.
22. 褚红玲, 李楠, 曾琳, 等. 混合方法研究及其在临床研究中的应用. 中华医学杂志, 2017, 97(12): 950-953.
23. 褚红玲, 倪凯文, 曾琳, 等. 混合方法研究在真实世界研究中的应用. 中国循证医学杂志, 2018, 18(11): 1203-1206.

Previous Article
Minimal clinically important difference: terminology and estimated methods
Next Article
Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews: reporting guideline

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Introduction and interpretation of process evaluation of complex interventions: medical research council guidance

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content