Evidence-based practices in the field of intellectual and developmental disabilities: An international consensus approach
As evidence-based practices become increasingly advocated for and used in the human services field it is important to integrate issues raised by three perspectives on evidence: empirical-analytical, phenomenological-existential, and post-structural. This article presents and discusses an evidence-based conceptual model and measurement framework that integrates these three perspectives and results in: multiple perspectives on evidence-based practices that involve the individual, the organization, and society; and multiple interpretation guidelines related to the quality, robustness, and relevance of the evidence. The article concludes with a discussion of five issues that need to be addressed in the future conceptualization, measurement and application of evidence-based practices. These five are the need to: expand the concepts of internal and external validity, approach evidence-based practices from a systems perspective, integrate the various perspectives regarding evidence-based practices, develop and evaluate evidence-based practices within the context of best practices, and develop a set of guidelines related to the translation of evidence into practice.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Schalock, Robert L. & Bonham, Gordon S. & Verdugo, Miguel A., 2008. "The conceptualization and measurement of quality of life: Implications for program planning and evaluation in the field of intellectual disabilities," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 181-190, May.
- Chen, Huey T., 2010. "The bottom-up approach to integrative validity: A new perspective for program evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 205-214, August.
- Veerman, Jan W. & van Yperen, Tom A., 2007. "Degrees of freedom and degrees of certainty: A developmental model for the establishment of evidence-based youth care," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 212-221, May.
- Chaffin, Mark & Friedrich, Bill, 2004. "Evidence-based treatments in child abuse and neglect," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(11), pages 1097-1113, November.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:34:y:2011:i:3:p:273-282. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.