Table 2.
Distribution of evaluation designs according to the evaluation field (n = 105)
| Health promotion/Prevention (n = 29) | Clinical care/ Health services research (n = 76) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total n (% a) |
Including process and/or mechanism evaluation n (%b) |
Total n (%a) |
Including process and/or mechanism evaluation n (%b) |
|
| Individual randomized trials | 6 (20.7) | 5 (83.3) | 17 (22.4) | 9 (52.9) |
| Randomized trial adaptations | 9 (31.0) | 9 (100) | 37 (48.7) | 34 (91.9) |
| Cluster randomized trials | 5 (17.2) | 5 (100) | 19 (25) | 18 (94.7) |
| Pragmatic trials | 1 (3.4) | 1 (100) | 8 (10.5) | 7 (87.5) |
| Cluster and pragmatic | 3 (10.3) | 3 (100) | 10 (13.2) | 9 (90) |
| Alternative methods to RCT | 14 (48.3) | 13 (92.9) | 22 (28.9) | 14 (63.6) |
| Quasi-experimental | 7 (24.1) | 6 (85.7) | 7 (9.2) | 6 (85.7) |
| Cohort study | 0 (0) | 0 | 6 (7.9) | 1 (16.7) |
| Realist evaluation | 2 (6.9) | 2 (100) | 5 (6.6) | 5 (100) |
| Case studies and other approaches | 5 (17.2) | 5 (100) | 4 (5.3) | 2 (50) |
an/ number of design (N = 108)
bn/number of such type of desing (for example: 87.5% of Individual RCT are combined with process and/or mechanism evaluation)