Published studies are typically pre-/post-implementation designs without control groups.
In brief, it is a cluster randomized design, with randomization at the level of the clinic, and delayed project implementation in the control group.
We find no evidence to reject the null hypothesis for all women in our sample.20 Therefore, the result suggests the existence of a common underlying trend for the treatment and control groups before the implementation of the AUH, which then appears to have been broken since the introduction of the program.
Process evaluation offers the potential to monitor and assure quality of intervention implementation and provides information on the depth and breadth of intervention implementation and adherence, secular trends and potential contamination of the control group.
However, the 28 previously published implementation programs differed greatly in participant selection, numbers of intervention sessions offered, inclusion of a control group, and how missing data were analyzed.
We used a controlled, interrupted time series design a series of observations taken at regular, evenly spaced intervals, before and after the implementation of an intervention, in both intervention and control groups.
The compliance was better in 8 of 11 depression indicators in the implementation group than the control group.
First, the lack of a control group limits the ability to assert causality between the implementation of the dashboard and the changes observed in guideline adherence.
Outcomes were assessed in a group of patients before implementation of the IR outpatient clinic (control group) and then compared to those in a group of patients who were treated after implementation of the IR outpatient clinic and had made a visit to the clinic.
