External Validity: Do Research Studies Apply to the Real World?

1998 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 38-39
Author(s):  
Brent L. Arnold
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
External Validity ◽  
The Real ◽  
Research Studies

scholarly journals Implementation Research in Community Based Rehabilitation

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. p237
Author(s):  
Wesam B. Darawsheh ◽  
Sawsan Tabbaa
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
Implementation Research ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Research Traditions ◽  
The Real ◽  
Research Tradition ◽  
Community Based Rehabilitation ◽  
Research Studies

Implementation research (IR) is a non-traditional methodology of research that enables the examination of application of multiple interventions within the complexities of the real-world, and the generation of solutions for emergent needs, especially in countries of low-moderate income. Community-based rehabilitation (CBR) is an evolving field of practice that lacks research traditions. Evidence guiding the practice of healthcare professionals in CBR and supporting its implementation is fragmented. A review of the literature was conducted to identify research studies pertinent to the employment of IR in CBR. This paper demonstrates that the principles of IR resonate with the principles of inclusion, equality, empowerment and partnership of CBR. It also posits that IR can serve as a research tradition to underpin and guide the conduction of research studies in CBR, and to provide the necessary evidence to support its accountability.

scholarly journals Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the oncologic activities (diagnosis, treatment, clinical trials enrollment) of a general hospital in a district with high prevalence of SARS-COV-2 in Italy

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Massimo Ambroggi ◽  
Chiara Citterio ◽  
Stefano Vecchia ◽  
Alessandra Riva ◽  
Patrizia Mordenti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Research ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
General Hospital ◽  
Cancer Diagnosis ◽  
Real World ◽  
Oral Treatment ◽  
The Real ◽  
High Prevalence ◽  
Research Studies

Abstract Purpose Little is known about the real impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on the qualitative and quantitative fall-out on the management of cancer patients. Our objective was to provide evidence of the effects of SARS-COV-2 on the management of cancer patients in the real world. Methods In a general hospital in a district in Italy with high prevalence of COVID-19 during the first wave, we retrospectively analyzed the data of oncologic activity, namely new cancer diagnosis, types of treatment (intravenous or by mouth), clinical research studies, and drug utilization, and compared the findings with those of 2019, before the pandemic. The data have been summarized in boxplot figures for median and interquartile range. Results In 2020, a significant reduction in new cancer diagnosis was demonstrated when compared with 2019, with 17.4% fewer cancer diagnoses, 84.5% fewer patients enrolled in clinical trials, a 10.6% reduction in intravenous antitumor treatment, and a 42.7% increase in oral anticancer treatment. Conclusion Our data indicate a significant reduction in cancer diagnosis, antitumor venous treatment, and patients enrolled in clinical research studies in 2020 compared with 2019, although there was a significant increase in oral treatment. These data suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic had a deep impact on the real-world management of cancer patients in a district of Italy with a high prevalence of COVID-19.

Importing social preferences across contexts and the pitfall of over-generalization across theories

2012 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne C. Pisor ◽  
Daniel M. T. Fessler
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
External Validity ◽  
Group Selection ◽  
Social Preferences ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Strong Reciprocity ◽  
The Real

AbstractClaims regarding negative strong reciprocity do indeed rest on experiments lacking established external validity, often without even a small “menu of options.” Guala's review should prompt strong reciprocity proponents to extend the real-world validity of their work, exploring the preferences participants bring to experiments. That said, Guala's approach fails to differentiate among group selection approaches and glosses over cross-cultural variability.

scholarly journals Promises and perils of experimentation: The mutual internal validity problem

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hause Lin ◽  
Kaitlyn M. Werner ◽  
Michael Inzlicht
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
External Validity ◽  
Internal Validity ◽  
Theory Testing ◽  
The Real

Researchers run experiments to test theories, search for and document phenomena, develop theories, or advise policymakers. When testing theories, experiments must be internally valid but do not have to be externally valid. However, when experiments are used to search for and document phenomena, develop theories, or advise policymakers, external validity matters. Conflating these goals and failing to recognize their tensions with validity concerns can lead to problems with theorizing. Experimenters in psychology should be aware of the mutual-internal-validity problem, long recognized by experimental economists. When phenomena elicited by experiments are used to develop theories that, in turn, influence the design of theory-testing experiments, experiments and theories can become wedded to each other and lose touch with reality. They capture and explain phenomena within but not beyond the laboratory. We highlight how triangulation can address validity problems by helping experiments and theories make contact with ideas from other disciplines and the real world.

scholarly journals Promises and Perils of Experimentation: The Mutual-Internal-Validity Problem

2021 ◽  
pp. 174569162097477
Author(s):  
Hause Lin ◽  
Kaitlyn M. Werner ◽  
Michael Inzlicht
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
External Validity ◽  
Internal Validity ◽  
Theory Testing ◽  
The Real

Researchers run experiments to test theories, search for and document phenomena, develop theories, or advise policymakers. When testing theories, experiments must be internally valid but do not have to be externally valid. However, when experiments are used to search for and document phenomena, develop theories, or advise policymakers, external validity matters. Conflating these goals and failing to recognize their tensions with validity concerns can lead to problems with theorizing. Psychological scientists should be aware of the mutual-internal-validity problem, long recognized by experimental economists. When phenomena elicited by experiments are used to develop theories that, in turn, influence the design of theory-testing experiments, experiments and theories can become wedded to each other and lose touch with reality. They capture and explain phenomena within but not beyond the laboratory. We highlight how triangulation can address validity problems by helping experiments and theories make contact with ideas from other disciplines and the real world.

Current Issues: Evidence-Based Practice for the Real World: Thoughts on Clinical Education in Communication Disorders

2010 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 100-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne K. Bothe
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Education ◽  
Real World ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Communication Disorders ◽  
University Faculty ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Speech Language Pathology ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
The Real ◽  
Language Pathology

This article presents some streamlined and intentionally oversimplified ideas about educating future communication disorders professionals to use some of the most basic principles of evidence-based practice. Working from a popular five-step approach, modifications are suggested that may make the ideas more accessible, and therefore more useful, for university faculty, other supervisors, and future professionals in speech-language pathology, audiology, and related fields.

The Real-World Fellowship

2006 ◽  
Vol 40 (7) ◽  
pp. 47
Author(s):  
LEE SAVIO BEERS
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
The Real
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document