Web-based interventions are often designed by health professionals with minimal input from end-users during the development process.
Community-based interventions are often embedded in dysfunctional health systems, within the messiness of family life, the stress engendered by poverty or violence, the competing interests of multiple stakeholders, and the sharp bite of unintended consequences to good intentions.
Evidence suggests that web-based interventions are often preferentially sought for the anonymity, their lack of face-to-face contact, and their capacity to be used privately at home [ 21].
The inconsistencies might be due to the fact that CCM-based interventions are often complex: they involve multiple health and social care disciplines and combine elements of existing interventions.
Internet-based interventions are often proposed as alternatives or adjunctive to other methods of delivery (face to face, phone, etc); therefore, it is important to establish an appropriate comparison base and construct incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for these types of programs.
This article argues that these interventions are often based on unwarranted assumptions about the relationship between resources, conflict and governance.
Knowledge interventions are often based on the idea that increased knowledge should impact behavior.
Interestingly, these dietary supplements, although considered pharmacological interventions, are often based on natural compounds present in specific foods (yogurt, fish oil, etc).
Rapid evaluations for new interventions are often conducted based on data from licensing studies before long-term clinical data of best quality are available.
These interventions are often individually tailored counselling-like interventions, sometimes based on e-health approaches.
Medical interventions are often required.
