Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health logoLink to Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
. 2003 Jul;57(7):527–529. doi: 10.1136/jech.57.7.527

Evidence, hierarchies, and typologies: horses for courses

M Petticrew 1, H Roberts 1
PMCID: PMC1732497  PMID: 12821702

Abstract

Debate is ongoing about the nature and use of evidence in public health decision making, and there seems to be an emerging consensus that the "hierarchy of evidence" may be difficult to apply in other settings. It may be unhelpful however to simply abandon the hierarchy without having a framework or guide to replace it. One such framework is discussed. This is based around a matrix, and emphasises the need to match research questions to specific types of research. This emphasis on methodological appropriateness, and on typologies rather than hierarchies of evidence may be helpful in organising and appraising public health evidence.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (86.6 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Benson K., Hartz A. J. A comparison of observational studies and randomized, controlled trials. N Engl J Med. 2000 Jun 22;342(25):1878–1886. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200006223422506. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bigby M. Challenges to the hierarchy of evidence: does the emperor have no clothes? Arch Dermatol. 2001 Mar;137(3):345–346. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Concato J., Shah N., Horwitz R. I. Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs. N Engl J Med. 2000 Jun 22;342(25):1887–1892. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200006223422507. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Harbour R., Miller J. A new system for grading recommendations in evidence based guidelines. BMJ. 2001 Aug 11;323(7308):334–336. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7308.334. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Liberati A., Buzzetti R., Grilli R., Magrini N., Minozzi S. Which guidelines can we trust?: Assessing strength of evidence behind recommendations for clinical practice. West J Med. 2001 Apr;174(4):262–265. doi: 10.1136/ewjm.174.4.262. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. McKee M., Britton A., Black N., McPherson K., Sanderson C., Bain C. Methods in health services research. Interpreting the evidence: choosing between randomised and non-randomised studies. BMJ. 1999 Jul 31;319(7205):312–315. doi: 10.1136/bmj.319.7205.312. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. McQueen D. V. The evidence debate. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2002 Feb;56(2):83–84. doi: 10.1136/jech.56.2.83. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Novick L. F., Kelter A. The Guide to Community Preventive Services: a public health imperative. Am J Prev Med. 2001 Nov;21(4 Suppl):13–15. doi: 10.1016/s0749-3797(01)00384-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Popay J., Williams G. Qualitative research and evidence-based healthcare. J R Soc Med. 1998;91 (Suppl 35):32–37. doi: 10.1177/014107689809135s08. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Roberts H. Qualitative research methods in interventions in injury. Arch Dis Child. 1997 Jun;76(6):487–489. doi: 10.1136/adc.76.6.487. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Rychetnik L., Frommer M., Hawe P., Shiell A. Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2002 Feb;56(2):119–127. doi: 10.1136/jech.56.2.119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Sackett D. L., Wennberg J. E. Choosing the best research design for each question. BMJ. 1997 Dec 20;315(7123):1636–1636. doi: 10.1136/bmj.315.7123.1636. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Saha S., Hoerger T. J., Pignone M. P., Teutsch S. M., Helfand M., Mandelblatt J. S., Cost Work Group, Third US Preventive Services Task Force The art and science of incorporating cost effectiveness into evidence-based recommendations for clinical preventive services. Am J Prev Med. 2001 Apr;20(3 Suppl):36–43. doi: 10.1016/s0749-3797(01)00260-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Schulz K. F., Chalmers I., Hayes R. J., Altman D. G. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA. 1995 Feb 1;273(5):408–412. doi: 10.1001/jama.273.5.408. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Sheldon T. A., Guyatt G. H., Haines A. Getting research findings into practice. When to act on the evidence. BMJ. 1998 Jul 11;317(7151):139–142. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7151.139. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Teare L., Cookson B., Stone S. Hand hygiene. BMJ. 2001 Aug 25;323(7310):411–412. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7310.411. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Truman B. I., Smith-Akin C. K., Hinman A. R., Gebbie K. M., Brownson R., Novick L. F., Lawrence R. S., Pappaioanou M., Fielding J., Evans C. A., Jr Developing the Guide to Community Preventive Services--overview and rationale. The Task Force on Community Preventive Services. Am J Prev Med. 2000 Jan;18(1 Suppl):18–26. doi: 10.1016/s0749-3797(99)00124-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES