ArticleHealth technology assessment (Winchester, England)2021
Framework for the development and evaluation of complex interventions: gap analysis, workshop and consultation-informed update.
Article in Health technology assessment (Winchester, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 295 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
295 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Unimodal to Multimodal Prehabilitation in Gastric Cancer Surgery: Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of Multicomponent Digital Health Interventions on Multidimensional Physical Activity in Older Adults: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- The effectiveness of alternatives to residential care for older people with on-going health and social care needs: a systematic review.BMC geriatrics · 2026Pooled it
- Initial programme theory developing for interprofessional case discussions (InCaD) in acute hospital care: a realist approach.BMC health services research · 2025Pooled it
- Approaches to economic evaluations of complex interventions in thailand: a systematic review.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- Best fit framework synthesis of qualitative studies on factors associated with medication nonadherence in people with type 2 diabetes using the COM-B model.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Determinants of healthy lifestyle behaviours in colorectal cancer survivors: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Implementing Internet-Delivered Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression and Anxiety in Adults: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- An IoT BLE based system literature review of real time location monitoring and tracking to shorten patient wait times in Malaysian public hospitals.F1000Research · 2025Pooled it
- Systematic Review Examining the Behavior Change Techniques in Medication Adherence Intervention Studies Among People With Type 2 Diabetes.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Patient and families' perspectives on telepalliative care: A systematic integrative review.Palliative medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Feasibility and acceptability of the Unified Protocol for anxiety and depression in Pakistan: a pilot randomized controlled trial.BMC psychiatry · 2026Trial
- Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Keep-On-Keep-Up digital falls prevention programme in community-dwelling older adults: results of a randomised controlled trial.Age and ageing · 2026Trial
- Effectiveness of the "CEME" oral health intervention program for preventing stroke-associated pneumonia in patients with post-stroke dysphagia: a randomized controlled trial.BMC oral health · 2025Trial
- Therapists perspectives on the Early Intervention after Rape study: a qualitative process evaluation of a randomized controlled trial.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2025Trial
- Painful, but necessary: a qualitative process evaluation on patient experiences with modified prolonged exposure as early intervention after rape (the EIR study).European journal of psychotraumatology · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Complex, low-intensity, individualised naturalistic developmental behavioural intervention in toddlers and pre-schoolers with autism spectrum disorder: The multicentre, observer-blind, parallel-group randomised-controlled A-FFIP trial.Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines · 2025Trial
- Trial
235 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Medical Research Council published the second edition of its framework in 2006 on developing and evaluating complex interventions. Since then, there have been considerable developments in the field of complex intervention research. The objective of this project was to update the framework in the light of these developments. The framework aims to help research teams prioritise research questions and design, and conduct research with an appropriate choice of methods, rather than to provide detailed guidance on the use of specific methods.
methodsThere were four stages to the update: (1) gap analysis to identify developments in the methods and practice since the previous framework was published; (2) an expert workshop of 36 participants to discuss the topics identified in the gap analysis; (3) an open consultation process to seek comments on a first draft of the new framework; and (4) findings from the previous stages were used to redraft the framework, and final expert review was obtained. The process was overseen by a Scientific Advisory Group representing the range of relevant National Institute for Health Research and Medical Research Council research investments.
resultsKey changes to the previous framework include (1) an updated definition of complex interventions, highlighting the dynamic relationship between the intervention and its context; (2) an emphasis on the use of diverse research perspectives: efficacy, effectiveness, theory-based and systems perspectives; (3) a focus on the usefulness of evidence as the basis for determining research perspective and questions; (4) an increased focus on interventions developed outside research teams, for example changes in policy or health services delivery; and (5) the identification of six 'core elements' that should guide all phases of complex intervention research: consider context; develop, refine and test programme theory; engage stakeholders; identify key uncertainties; refine the intervention; and economic considerations. We divide the research process into four phases: development, feasibility, evaluation and implementation. For each phase we provide a concise summary of recent developments, key points to address and signposts to further reading. We also present case studies to illustrate the points being made throughout. LIMITATIONS: The framework aims to help research teams prioritise research questions and design and conduct research with an appropriate choice of methods, rather than to provide detailed guidance on the use of specific methods. In many of the areas of innovation that we highlight, such as the use of systems approaches, there are still only a few practical examples. We refer to more specific and detailed guidance where available and note where promising approaches require further development.
conclusionsThis new framework incorporates developments in complex intervention research published since the previous edition was written in 2006. As well as taking account of established practice and recent refinements, we draw attention to new approaches and place greater emphasis on economic considerations in complex intervention research. We have introduced a new emphasis on the importance of context and the value of understanding interventions as 'events in systems' that produce effects through interactions with features of the contexts in which they are implemented. The framework adopts a pluralist approach, encouraging researchers and research funders to adopt diverse research perspectives and to select research questions and methods pragmatically, with the aim of providing evidence that is useful to decision-makers. FUTURE WORK: We call for further work to develop relevant methods and provide examples in practice. The use of this framework should be monitored and the move should be made to a more fluid resource in the future, for example a web-based format that can be frequently updated to incorporate new material and links to emerging resources.
fundingThis project was jointly funded by the Medical Research Council (MRC) and the National Institute for Health Research (Department of Health and Social Care 73514).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.