Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): Dr Katherine Deane
Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.
Occupational therapists reading reports of randomised controlled trials and trying to interpret the reliability and size of effects stated are frequently frustrated by poor standards of reporting. They need to be able to evaluate the profession's interventions critically: to stop the ineffective, to reduce the hazardous and to promote the effective., Without good quality trials and trial reports, the profession will continue to be dogged by systematic reviews that conclude that there is insufficient evidence to support or refute the use of occupational therapy. These, in turn, will mean that the use of occupational therapy cannot be promoted strongly in national guidelines and, therefore, services may become restricted., This review covers some of the issues to be considered when writing or reading a report of a randomised controlled trial of a complex intervention, such as occupational therapy.
Author(s): Deane KHO
Publication type: Article
Publication status: Published
Journal: British Journal of Occupational Therapy
Year: 2006
Volume: 69
Issue: 6
Pages: 248-254
ISSN (print): 0308-0226
ISSN (electronic): 1477-6006
Publisher: College of Occupational Therapists Ltd.
Notes: Journal Article, Tables/Charts
