Salīdzināt metodes
Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.
| Pragmatiskās kontroles grupas eksperimentālais dizains× | Krustojuma kontroles grupas eksperimentālais dizains× | |
|---|---|---|
| Nozare | Eksperimentu plānošana | Eksperimentu plānošana |
| Saime | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Izcelsmes gads≠ | 1967 (seminal distinction); 2009 (PRECIS operationalization) | Mid-20th century; systematic treatment from 1980s onward |
| Autors≠ | Schwartz & Lellouch (pragmatic vs explanatory distinction); extended by PRECIS framework (Thorpe et al.) | Established in clinical pharmacology and agricultural research; formalized by B. Jones & M. G. Kenward |
| Tips≠ | Experimental design (pragmatic variant) | Experimental design |
| Pirmavots≠ | Schwartz, D., & Lellouch, J. (1967). Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 20(8), 637–648. DOI ↗ | Jones, B., & Kenward, M. G. (2003). Design and Analysis of Cross-Over Trials (2nd ed.). Chapman and Hall/CRC. ISBN: 978-1584883500 |
| Citi nosaukumi | pragmatic controlled trial, effectiveness trial with control group, real-world control group design, pragmatic comparative design | crossover controlled trial, within-subject crossover with control, AB/BA crossover controlled design, repeated-measures crossover with control arm |
| Saistītās | 6 | 6 |
| Kopsavilkums≠ | A pragmatic control group experimental design tests whether an intervention works under routine, real-world conditions by comparing it against a control condition — typically usual care or an active comparator — rather than a tightly controlled placebo. It prioritises external validity and applicability over the internal purity of an explanatory efficacy trial, asking whether an intervention makes a meaningful difference to people as they are actually treated in practice. | A crossover control group experimental design is an experimental approach in which participants are randomly assigned to sequences of conditions that include both a treatment and a control (no-treatment or placebo) period, with each participant experiencing both the experimental and control conditions in succession. By using each participant as their own control across periods, this design sharply reduces between-subject variability and typically requires fewer participants than parallel group trials to achieve equivalent statistical power. |
| ScholarGateDatu kopa ↗ |
|
|