Compară metode
Examinează metodele selectate una lângă alta; rândurile care diferă sunt evidențiate.
| Design experimental pragmatic pretest-posttest× | Studiu pragmatic randomizat controlat× | |
|---|---|---|
| Domeniu | Design experimental | Design experimental |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Anul apariției≠ | 1963 (pre-post design); 1967 (pragmatic distinction) | 1967 |
| Autorul original≠ | Schwartz & Lellouch (pragmatic framing); Campbell & Stanley (pre-post design) | Daniel Schwartz and Joseph Lellouch |
| Tip≠ | Experimental / quasi-experimental design | Experimental design — pragmatic trial |
| Sursa seminală≠ | Schwartz, D., & Lellouch, J. (1967). Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 20(8), 637-648. DOI ↗ | Schwartz, D., & Lellouch, J. (1967). Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 20(8), 637–648. DOI ↗ |
| Denumiri alternative | pragmatic pre-post design, real-world pretest-posttest study, effectiveness pre-post design, pragmatic before-after study | pRCT, pragmatic trial, practical clinical trial, real-world RCT |
| Înrudite≠ | 5 | 4 |
| Rezumat≠ | A pragmatic pretest-posttest experimental design combines the before-after measurement structure of the classic pre-post design with the real-world, high-external-validity ethos of pragmatic research. Participants are assessed on relevant outcomes before an intervention is delivered in routine or naturalistic conditions, then re-assessed afterward. The goal is to estimate the effectiveness of the intervention as it actually works in practice rather than under ideal, tightly controlled efficacy conditions. | A pragmatic randomized controlled trial (pRCT) tests whether an intervention works under ordinary, real-world conditions — broad eligibility, flexible delivery, and routine care settings. Participants are still randomly assigned to treatment or control, preserving causal inference, but the study is designed to reflect the diversity and variability of actual practice rather than the ideal conditions of an explanatory trial. The defining framework is the PRECIS-2 tool, which maps any RCT along nine pragmatic-to-explanatory dimensions. |
| ScholarGateSet de date ↗ |
|
|