Reviewing evidence on complex social interventions: appraising implementation in systematic reviews of the health effects of organisational-level workplace interventions
2009

Reviewing Evidence on Workplace Interventions

Sample size: 103 publication Evidence: low

Author Information

Author(s): M Egan, C Bambra, M Petticrew, M Whitehead

Primary Institution: Medical Research Council Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, UK

Hypothesis

How does the implementation of workplace interventions affect their outcomes?

Conclusion

Detailed reporting of implementation is crucial for understanding the effectiveness of workplace interventions.

Supporting Evidence

  • 103 studies were identified and appraised, evaluating four types of workplace intervention.
  • Many studies referred to implementation, but reporting was generally poor and anecdotal.
  • A minority of studies described how implementation may have influenced outcomes.

Takeaway

This study looked at how well workplace interventions are reported and found that many studies don't explain how they were implemented, which can lead to misunderstandings about their effectiveness.

Methodology

Data on implementation were obtained from four systematic reviews of complex interventions in workplace settings, using a checklist and unstructured reading.

Potential Biases

Poor reporting of implementation may lead to misinterpretation of intervention effectiveness.

Limitations

The study primarily examines employment interventions, which may limit the generalizability of the findings.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1136/jech.2007.071233

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication