{"title":"基于证据的社区服务实践:多元视角下的育儿项目评估。","authors":"Ana Catarina Canário, Orlanda Cruz, Ana Almeida","doi":"10.1080/26408066.2025.2528917","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The current review sought to characterize evaluation strategies relevant to evidence-based parenting programs (EBPP) implementation in real-world settings, specifically addressing programs' implementation characteristics, outcomes and economic evaluations under a pluralistic approach.</p><p><strong>Materials and method: </strong>We conducted a narrative review of peer-reviewed literature completing the scale for the assessment of narrative review articles (SANRA) and following the preferred format Introduction, Method, Results and Discussion (IMRD) to outweigh appraisals of non-systematic procedures. We searched Web of Science, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, Education Source Ultimate, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, and Sociology Source Ultimate for keywords related to the concepts of parenting program, evaluation, implementation, pluralistic approach, and community-based services.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We present the state-of-the-art of the evaluation of EBPP, detailing evaluation strategies through the lens of a pluralistic approach, showcasing what counts as evidence for implementation, outcome and economic evaluations of EBPP.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Our groundwork posits the rationale for different evaluation designs addressing multiple questions for evidence, illustrating how program implementation and outcomes evaluation can critically contribute to an evidence-based practice. We also turn to the challenges implicit in translational studies and why research and practice are bound to be inseparable allies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Exclusively addressing programs' evaluation outcomes may be insufficient. Outcome evaluations should be paired with implementation and economic evaluations to better understand how programs work, which could be more suitable for families according to their needs and characteristics, but also to inform cost-sensitive decisions, and reduce societal burden and costs.</p>","PeriodicalId":73742,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evidence-based social work (2019)","volume":" ","pages":"1-21"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evidence-Based Practice in Community-Based Services: Toward an Evaluation of Parenting Programs Under a Pluralistic Approach.\",\"authors\":\"Ana Catarina Canário, Orlanda Cruz, Ana Almeida\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/26408066.2025.2528917\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The current review sought to characterize evaluation strategies relevant to evidence-based parenting programs (EBPP) implementation in real-world settings, specifically addressing programs' implementation characteristics, outcomes and economic evaluations under a pluralistic approach.</p><p><strong>Materials and method: </strong>We conducted a narrative review of peer-reviewed literature completing the scale for the assessment of narrative review articles (SANRA) and following the preferred format Introduction, Method, Results and Discussion (IMRD) to outweigh appraisals of non-systematic procedures. We searched Web of Science, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, Education Source Ultimate, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, and Sociology Source Ultimate for keywords related to the concepts of parenting program, evaluation, implementation, pluralistic approach, and community-based services.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We present the state-of-the-art of the evaluation of EBPP, detailing evaluation strategies through the lens of a pluralistic approach, showcasing what counts as evidence for implementation, outcome and economic evaluations of EBPP.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Our groundwork posits the rationale for different evaluation designs addressing multiple questions for evidence, illustrating how program implementation and outcomes evaluation can critically contribute to an evidence-based practice. We also turn to the challenges implicit in translational studies and why research and practice are bound to be inseparable allies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Exclusively addressing programs' evaluation outcomes may be insufficient. Outcome evaluations should be paired with implementation and economic evaluations to better understand how programs work, which could be more suitable for families according to their needs and characteristics, but also to inform cost-sensitive decisions, and reduce societal burden and costs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73742,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of evidence-based social work (2019)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-21\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of evidence-based social work (2019)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/26408066.2025.2528917\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evidence-based social work (2019)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/26408066.2025.2528917","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:本综述旨在描述现实环境中与循证育儿计划(EBPP)实施相关的评估策略,特别是在多元方法下解决计划的实施特征、结果和经济评估。材料和方法:我们对同行评议文献进行了叙述性综述,完成了叙述性综述文章的评估量表(SANRA),并遵循首选的格式引言、方法、结果和讨论(IMRD),以超过非系统程序的评估。我们在Web of Science、PsycARTICLES、PsycINFO、Education Source Ultimate、Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection和Sociology Source Ultimate中搜索了与育儿计划概念、评估、实施、多元化方法和社区服务相关的关键词。结果:我们介绍了EBPP评估的最新技术,通过多元方法详细介绍了评估策略,展示了EBPP实施、结果和经济评估的证据。讨论:我们的基础假设了解决多个证据问题的不同评估设计的基本原理,说明了项目实施和结果评估如何对基于证据的实践做出重要贡献。我们还将转向翻译研究中隐含的挑战,以及为什么研究和实践必然是不可分割的盟友。结论:仅针对项目的评估结果可能是不够的。结果评估应与实施和经济评估相结合,以更好地了解项目的运作方式,从而根据家庭的需求和特点更适合他们,同时也为成本敏感型决策提供信息,并减少社会负担和成本。
Evidence-Based Practice in Community-Based Services: Toward an Evaluation of Parenting Programs Under a Pluralistic Approach.
Purpose: The current review sought to characterize evaluation strategies relevant to evidence-based parenting programs (EBPP) implementation in real-world settings, specifically addressing programs' implementation characteristics, outcomes and economic evaluations under a pluralistic approach.
Materials and method: We conducted a narrative review of peer-reviewed literature completing the scale for the assessment of narrative review articles (SANRA) and following the preferred format Introduction, Method, Results and Discussion (IMRD) to outweigh appraisals of non-systematic procedures. We searched Web of Science, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, Education Source Ultimate, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, and Sociology Source Ultimate for keywords related to the concepts of parenting program, evaluation, implementation, pluralistic approach, and community-based services.
Results: We present the state-of-the-art of the evaluation of EBPP, detailing evaluation strategies through the lens of a pluralistic approach, showcasing what counts as evidence for implementation, outcome and economic evaluations of EBPP.
Discussion: Our groundwork posits the rationale for different evaluation designs addressing multiple questions for evidence, illustrating how program implementation and outcomes evaluation can critically contribute to an evidence-based practice. We also turn to the challenges implicit in translational studies and why research and practice are bound to be inseparable allies.
Conclusion: Exclusively addressing programs' evaluation outcomes may be insufficient. Outcome evaluations should be paired with implementation and economic evaluations to better understand how programs work, which could be more suitable for families according to their needs and characteristics, but also to inform cost-sensitive decisions, and reduce societal burden and costs.