of these outcomes has been demonstrated in at least one study using an experimental or quasi-experimental design.
Experimental designs require random assignment, a control or comparison
group, and pre- and post-intervention outcome assessments.
Quasi-experimental designs do not require random assignment, but do
require a comparison or control group and pre- and post-intervention
outcome assessments. Comparison/ control groups must be a no-treatment
control group, a wait-list control group, a treatment-as-usual comparison
group, or an intervention that is presumed to be ineffective or
substantially less effective than the intervention (e.g., a “placebo”
control or, in cases in which providing no treatment might be considered
unethical, less effective treatments, even if not treatment-as-usual, such
as “supportive therapy”). Studies with single-group, pretest-posttest
designs or single-group, longitudinal/multiple time series do not meet
this requirement, but will be considered to identify emerging programs and
practices for consideration in the Learning Center.
Comparative effectiveness trials, in which two interventions, both presumed to be equally effective, are compared, and studies in which the effects of the same intervention on various subpopulations are compared or in which various doses or components of the same intervention are compared will not be reviewed, but may be submitted as supporting documentation.
results of these studies have been published in a peer-reviewed journal or other professional publication, or
documented in a comprehensive evaluation report, published within the
previous 25 years.
Comprehensive evaluation reports must include a review of the literature,
theoretical framework, purpose, methodology, findings/results with
statistical analysis and p values for significant outcomes, discussion,
and conclusions (The NREPP Open Submission Process, 2016).
The original NREPP evaluation looked at outcome research reports for the following factors: