Social Work Commons^™

Making Sense Of Meta-Analysis: A Critique Of "Effectiveness Of Long-Term Psychodynamic Psychotherapy", Julia H. Littell, Aron Shlonsky

Graduate School of Social Work and Social Research Faculty Research and Scholarship

Evidence-based practice depends in part on knowledge derived from relevant research. For any given topic, there are likely to be many, potentially relevant studies; a careful appraisal and synthesis of the results of these studies is needed to understand the state of the empirical evidence. Meta-analysis is widely used to combine results of quantitative studies; yet this method is unfamiliar to many people and, as a result, meta-analyses are often uncritically accepted. In this article, we argue that meta-analysis is only one component of a good research synthesis. We critique a recent meta-analysis on the effectiveness of long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy, …

Toward Evidence-Informed Policy And Practice In Child Welfare, Julia H. Littell, Aron Shlonsky

Graduate School of Social Work and Social Research Faculty Research and Scholarship

Drawing on the authors’ experience in the international Campbell Collaboration, this essay presents a principled and pragmatic approach to evidence-informed decisions about child welfare. This approach takes into account the growing body of empirical evidence on the reliability and validity of various methods of research synthesis. It also considers wide variations in the cultural, economic, and political contexts in which policy and practice decisions are made—and the contexts in which children live and die. This essay illustrates the use of Campbell and Cochrane systematic reviews to inform child welfare decisions in the diverse contexts that exist around the globe.

Evidence-Based Or Biased? The Quality Of Published Reviews Of Evidence-Based Practices, Julia H. Littell

Graduate School of Social Work and Social Research Faculty Research and Scholarship

Objective

To assess methods used to identify, analyze, and synthesize results of empirical research on intervention effects, and determine whether published reviews are vulnerable to various sources and types of bias.

Methods

Study 1 examined the methods, sources, and conclusions of 37 published reviews of research on effects of a model program. Study 2 compared findings of one published trial with summaries of results of that trial that appeared in published reviews.

Results

Study 1: Published reviews varied in terms of the transparency of inclusion criteria, strategies for locating relevant published and unpublished data, standards used to evaluate evidence, and …