Comparer des méthodes

	Méthodes mixtes axées sur l'évaluation d'une intervention	Évaluation de programme	Essai contrôlé randomisé (ECR)
Domaine	Conception de la recherche	Méthodes de terrain	Plans d'expériences
Famille	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline	Hypothesis test
Année d'origine	2000s (systematized ~2007–2011)	1960s–1970s (Scriven 1967; Stufflebeam CIPP model 1971)	1948
Auteur d'origine	Creswell & Plano Clark (systematized); roots in evaluation research by Patton and Shadish	Michael Scriven; Daniel Stufflebeam; Peter Rossi	James Lind (early precursor, 1747); modern formulation: Austin Bradford Hill & Medical Research Council (1948)
Type	Mixed methods research design	Applied evaluation methodology	Interventional comparative study
Source fondatrice	Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. ISBN: 978-1483346298	Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach (7th ed.). Sage. ISBN: 978-0761908944	Schulz, K.F., Altman, D.G., Moher, D., for the CONSORT Group (2010). CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group Randomised Trials. BMJ, 340, c332.
Alias	intervention mixed methods evaluation, mixed methods intervention evaluation, program evaluation mixed methods, evaluation mixed methods	evaluation research, program assessment, educational evaluation, systematic program evaluation	RCT, randomised controlled trial, clinical trial, Randomize Kontrollü Çalışma (RCT) Tasarımı
Apparentées	2	3	7
Résumé	Evaluation-focused intervention mixed methods is a research design that embeds both quantitative and qualitative strands within an intervention or program evaluation study. It combines outcome measurement — typically from a randomized or quasi-experimental trial — with qualitative investigation of how and why the intervention worked, for whom, and under what conditions. The design is widely used in health, education, social service, and policy evaluation contexts where understanding mechanisms and context is as important as measuring effectiveness.	Program evaluation is a systematic, empirically grounded process of collecting and analyzing information about a program to determine its merit, worth, or significance. Applied across education, public health, social services, and policy, it addresses questions such as whether a program is reaching its target population, whether it is being implemented as designed, and whether it is producing the intended outcomes. It draws on both quantitative and qualitative methods and serves accountability, improvement, or knowledge-generation purposes.	A randomized controlled trial (RCT) is the gold standard experimental design in clinical and health research, in which participants are randomly allocated to a treatment group or a control group so that the effect of an intervention can be measured with the highest possible degree of internal validity. The modern parallel-group RCT was formalized by Austin Bradford Hill and the Medical Research Council in their landmark streptomycin trial of 1948, and its reporting is governed today by the CONSORT 2010 guidelines (Schulz et al., 2010).