I am conducting a review of feasibility/pilot study of a psychological intervention, and wonder if anyone has suggestions about how to systematically judge the quality of these studies. They are of differing design, some case studies, some quasi-experimental, some open trial. I was suggested by one of the professors in my university to use the reporting guidelines for feasibility/pilot studies:
Article Guidelines for reporting non-randomised pilot and feasibility studies
But I am not sure if this is the most appropriate way to evaluate the studies, since it is mainly about reporting, and not so much about what would be a good or badly conducted feasibility/pilot study.
Does anyone know about reviews where such studies have been assessed for quality? Or have any suggestions regarding how this could be done?
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Elvind
Previous answer sent to wrong question box. Herewith more case study quality evaluative works
Best wishes
Steve
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228621600_Qualitative_Case_Study_Methodology_Study_Design_and_Implementation_for_Novice_Researchers
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232267014_Qualitative_Research_Case_study_evaluation
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/qualitative-evaluation-methods
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265682891_The_case_study_as_a_type_of_qualitative_research
Were the pilot studies either published as is or as as a full study. This would be a good minimum requirement for your study eventually. Best wishes David Booth
Elvind,
This may interest you
The case study as a type of qualitative research
See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265682891
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology