Abstract
Because professionals sometimes do more harm than good when they intervene in the lives of other people, their policies and practices should be informed by rigorous, transparent, up-to-date evaluations. Surveys often reveal wide variations in the type and frequency of practice and policy interventions, and this evidence of collective uncertainty should prompt the humility that is a precondition for rigorous evaluation. Evaluation should begin with systematic assessment of as high a proportion as possible of existing relevant, reliable research, and then, if appropriate, additional research. Systematic, up-to-date reviews of research—such as those that the Cochrane and Campbell Collaborations endeavor to prepare and maintain—are designed to minimize the likelihood that the effects of interventions will be confused with the effects of biases and chance. Policy makers and practitioners can choose whether, and if so how, they wish their policies and practices to be informed by research. They should be clear, however, that the lives of other people will often be affected by the validity of their judgments.
Keywords
HarmPsychological interventionHumilitySystematic reviewPsychologyPublic relationsEngineering ethicsPolitical scienceSocial psychologyMEDLINELawEngineering
Related Publications
Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 9. Grading evidence and recommendations
Should WHO grade the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations? Users of recommendations need to know how much confidence they can place in the underlying evidence...
Prediction models for diagnosis and prognosis of covid-19: systematic review and critical appraisal
Abstract Objective To review and appraise the validity and usefulness of published and preprint reports of prediction models for prognosis of patients with covid-19, and for det...
Scope, quality, and inclusivity of clinical guidelines produced early in the covid-19 pandemic: rapid review
Abstract Objective To appraise the availability, quality, and inclusivity of clinical guidelines produced in the early stage of the coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) pandemic....
A systematic review: the influence of social media on depression, anxiety and psychological distress in adolescents
While becoming inextricable to our daily lives, online social media are blamed for increasing mental health problems in younger people. This systematic review synthesized eviden...
Tools for assessing quality and susceptibility to bias in observational studies in epidemiology: a systematic review and annotated bibliography
A number of useful assessment tools have been identified by this report. Tools should be rigorously developed, evidence-based, valid, reliable and easy to use. There is a need t...
Publication Info
- Year
- 2003
- Type
- article
- Volume
- 589
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 22-40
- Citations
- 224
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Altmetric
PlumX Metrics
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
224
OpenAlex
11
Influential
147
CrossRef
Cite This
Iain Chalmers
(2003).
Trying to do more Good than Harm in Policy and Practice: The Role of Rigorous, Transparent, Up-to-Date Evaluations.
The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
, 589
(1)
, 22-40.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716203254762
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1177/0002716203254762