Compară metode
Examinează metodele selectate una lângă alta; rândurile care diferă sunt evidențiate.
| Designul pragmatic Solomon cu patru grupuri× | Studiu pragmatic randomizat controlat× | |
|---|---|---|
| Domeniu | Design experimental | Design experimental |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Anul apariției≠ | 1949 (Solomon design); pragmatic variant in applied use from 1990s onward | 1967 |
| Autorul original≠ | Solomon four-group design: Richard L. Solomon (1949); pragmatic orientation formalized by Schwartz & Lellouch (1967) and Thorpe et al. (2009) | Daniel Schwartz and Joseph Lellouch |
| Tip≠ | Experimental design (pragmatic variant) | Experimental design — pragmatic trial |
| Sursa seminală≠ | Solomon, R. L. (1949). An extension of control group design. Psychological Bulletin, 46(2), 137–150. 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 S4GD, real-world Solomon four-group design, pragmatic pretest-control design, pragmatic Solomon design | pRCT, pragmatic trial, practical clinical trial, real-world RCT |
| Înrudite≠ | 5 | 4 |
| Rezumat≠ | The Pragmatic Solomon Four-Group Design combines the pretest-sensitization control logic of the classic Solomon (1949) four-group structure with the broad eligibility, flexible delivery, and real-world conditions characteristic of pragmatic trials. Four groups are formed: two receive the intervention (one pretested, one not) and two serve as controls (one pretested, one not), allowing simultaneous estimation of treatment effects and pretest sensitization effects under ecologically valid settings. | 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 ↗ |
|
|