This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Qureshi, H. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Evidence in Policy and Practice

What Kinds of Research Designs?

University of York, England

•Summary: Over-generalization of the ‘effectiveness hierarchy’, and echoes of past paradigm wars about methodology, persist in generating conflicting judgements about the value of different research designs for evidence-based practice. A range of ways in which the worth of research is actually judged, and might be judged, are elaborated. The article then focuses on specific examples of the use of research, considering the kinds of evidence which could usefully support practice with carers, and the evidence which has been used to justify policy (the National Service Framework) for older people. The article concludes by using ideas about complex adaptive systems to illustrate similarities between uses of evidence in policy and individual practice.

•Findings: Fundamentally, considerations which affect our judgements about the worth of research relate to the values expressed in the process of conducting the research, and the likely usefulness of the results. Inboth policy and practice, a whole range of research evidence can be, and is, used to support values, identify and understand problems, inform negotiations, and suggest solutions, without necessarily determining action to be taken in particular cases.

•Applications: The article is a contribution to the ongoing debate about evidence-based practice in social care. It aims to clarify concepts and realities and thus promote an approach to this issue which remains rigorous but is inclusive with regard to both methods and stake aholders.

Key Words: evidence-based practice • hierarchy of research methods policy

Journal of Social Work, Vol. 4, No. 1, 7-23 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/1468017304042418


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. E. Carrilio Accountability, Evidence, and the Use of Information Systems in Social Service Programs Journal of Social Work, April 1, 2008; 8(2): 135 - 148. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. R. Crisp, M. R. Anderson, J. Orme, and P. Green Lister Assessment Frameworks: A Critical Reflection Br. J. Soc. Work, September 1, 2007; 37(6): 1059 - 1077. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Regehr, S. Stern, and A. Shlonsky Operationalizing Evidence-Based Practice: The Development of an Institute for Evidence-Based Social Work Research on Social Work Practice, May 1, 2007; 17(3): 408 - 416. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Arnd-Caddigan and R. Pozzuto Truth in Our Time Qualitative Social Work, December 1, 2006; 5(4): 423 - 440. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. Stanley Editorial Journal of Social Work, April 1, 2005; 5(1): 5 - 6. [PDF]

				S. Houston Philosophy, Theory and Method in Social Work: Challenging Empiricism's Claim on Evidence-based Practice Journal of Social Work, April 1, 2005; 5(1): 7 - 20. [Abstract] [PDF]