Twenty-five years ago, the term “evidence-based practice” did not exist and when it was first introduced, it started out as referring to evidence based medicine (Shlonsky, 2011, p. 363). Now, using the Internet, social work practitioners can find many different kinds of research about a variety of subjects; however, the problem becomes determining what kinds of interventions to use in different situations. A major obstacle to researchers is the availability of a wide variety of literature on a subject causing time constraints to finding appropriate, evidence-based interventions (Rubin & Babbie, 2013, p 26-28).
Objections to using interventions that are advocated based on a certain set of standards for an organization are that “individuals are treated as a set of problems rather than the unique and unpredictable people that they are” (Shlonsky, Noonan, Littell, & Montgomery, 2011, p. 363). Also, that practitioners use interventions that they are not comfortable with using, that choice is taken out of their hands. In addition, there is a need for better efficiency in researching and appraising data in deciding interventions (Shlonsky, Noonan, Littell, & Montgomery, 2011, p. 363).
Systematic reviews are an answer to these needs. Systematic reviews use “scientific methods for identifying, analysing (sic) and synthesizing quantitative evidence from existing studies in order to summarise (sic) results and allow readers to draw conclusions about the totality of research in a given area of work” (Shlonsky, Noonan, Littell, & Montgomery, 2011, p. 363). Examples of systematic reviews are the Campbell Collaboration and the Cochrane Collaboration (Rubin & Babbie, 2013, p 26-28). Using these reviews may be the best starting point, especially for researching students who are new to professional research.
Shlonsky, A., Noonan, E., Littell, J., & Montgomery, P. (2011). The role of systematic reviews and the Campbell Collaboration in the realization of evidence-informed practice. Clinical Social Work Journal, 39(4), 362-368. doi:10.1007/s10615-010-0307-0
Rubin, A., & Babbie, E. (2013). Brooks/Cole empowerment series: Essential research methods for social work. (3rded.). Australia: Brooks/Cole Cengage Learning.
Written By,
Diane Allen
Student Learner
Tarleton State University
Objections to using interventions that are advocated based on a certain set of standards for an organization are that “individuals are treated as a set of problems rather than the unique and unpredictable people that they are” (Shlonsky, Noonan, Littell, & Montgomery, 2011, p. 363). Also, that practitioners use interventions that they are not comfortable with using, that choice is taken out of their hands. In addition, there is a need for better efficiency in researching and appraising data in deciding interventions (Shlonsky, Noonan, Littell, & Montgomery, 2011, p. 363).
Systematic reviews are an answer to these needs. Systematic reviews use “scientific methods for identifying, analysing (sic) and synthesizing quantitative evidence from existing studies in order to summarise (sic) results and allow readers to draw conclusions about the totality of research in a given area of work” (Shlonsky, Noonan, Littell, & Montgomery, 2011, p. 363). Examples of systematic reviews are the Campbell Collaboration and the Cochrane Collaboration (Rubin & Babbie, 2013, p 26-28). Using these reviews may be the best starting point, especially for researching students who are new to professional research.
Shlonsky, A., Noonan, E., Littell, J., & Montgomery, P. (2011). The role of systematic reviews and the Campbell Collaboration in the realization of evidence-informed practice. Clinical Social Work Journal, 39(4), 362-368. doi:10.1007/s10615-010-0307-0
Rubin, A., & Babbie, E. (2013). Brooks/Cole empowerment series: Essential research methods for social work. (3rded.). Australia: Brooks/Cole Cengage Learning.
Written By,
Diane Allen
Student Learner
Tarleton State University