{"title":"社会心理干预的大型试验:来自个人安置和支持的例子。","authors":"Justin D Metcalfe, Kim T Mueser, Robert E Drake","doi":"10.3389/ijph.2026.1609143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Large demonstration projects for health interventions often use randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to test the effectiveness of interventions implemented at larger scales, serving as crucial contributors to policy and funding decisions. Such trials are subject to limitations common to all RCTs, but their size and importance magnify the costs of failure to satisfy the assumptions for valid causal inference and generalizability. We examine common reasons for such threats to validity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We examined large (N > 1,000) IPS RCTs for aspects of design and execution that undermine the validity of their results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified three large IPS RCTs and identified threats to validity associated with treatment adherence and attrition.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Large trials should rely on pilot studies to ensure that difficulties with recruitment, implementation of and participation in interventions, and follow-up measurement do not compromise study validity; intervention fidelity and participation should be measured to permit evaluation of study success. Funders should require and support the use of pilot studies and other prior research to justify the introduction of an intervention to a population and anticipate potential threats to validity.</p>","PeriodicalId":14322,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Public Health","volume":"71 ","pages":"1609143"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13286859/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Large trials of psychosocial interventions: examples from individual placement and support.\",\"authors\":\"Justin D Metcalfe, Kim T Mueser, Robert E Drake\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/ijph.2026.1609143\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Large demonstration projects for health interventions often use randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to test the effectiveness of interventions implemented at larger scales, serving as crucial contributors to policy and funding decisions. Such trials are subject to limitations common to all RCTs, but their size and importance magnify the costs of failure to satisfy the assumptions for valid causal inference and generalizability. We examine common reasons for such threats to validity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We examined large (N > 1,000) IPS RCTs for aspects of design and execution that undermine the validity of their results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified three large IPS RCTs and identified threats to validity associated with treatment adherence and attrition.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Large trials should rely on pilot studies to ensure that difficulties with recruitment, implementation of and participation in interventions, and follow-up measurement do not compromise study validity; intervention fidelity and participation should be measured to permit evaluation of study success. Funders should require and support the use of pilot studies and other prior research to justify the introduction of an intervention to a population and anticipate potential threats to validity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14322,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Public Health\",\"volume\":\"71 \",\"pages\":\"1609143\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-06-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13286859/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/ijph.2026.1609143\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2026/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/ijph.2026.1609143","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Large trials of psychosocial interventions: examples from individual placement and support.
Objectives: Large demonstration projects for health interventions often use randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to test the effectiveness of interventions implemented at larger scales, serving as crucial contributors to policy and funding decisions. Such trials are subject to limitations common to all RCTs, but their size and importance magnify the costs of failure to satisfy the assumptions for valid causal inference and generalizability. We examine common reasons for such threats to validity.
Methods: We examined large (N > 1,000) IPS RCTs for aspects of design and execution that undermine the validity of their results.
Results: We identified three large IPS RCTs and identified threats to validity associated with treatment adherence and attrition.
Conclusion: Large trials should rely on pilot studies to ensure that difficulties with recruitment, implementation of and participation in interventions, and follow-up measurement do not compromise study validity; intervention fidelity and participation should be measured to permit evaluation of study success. Funders should require and support the use of pilot studies and other prior research to justify the introduction of an intervention to a population and anticipate potential threats to validity.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Public Health publishes scientific articles relevant to global public health, from different countries and cultures, and assembles them into issues that raise awareness and understanding of public health problems and solutions. The Journal welcomes submissions of original research, critical and relevant reviews, methodological papers and manuscripts that emphasize theoretical content. IJPH sometimes publishes commentaries and opinions. Special issues highlight key areas of current research. The Editorial Board''s mission is to provide a thoughtful forum for contemporary issues and challenges in global public health research and practice.