Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Dec;89(12):1567-1576.
doi: 10.1111/ans.15475. Epub 2019 Oct 16.

Hawthorne effect on surgical studies

Charis Demetriou  1 , Lisi Hu  1 , Toby O Smith  2 , Caroline B Hing  3
Affiliations

Hawthorne effect on surgical studies

Charis Demetriou et al. ANZ J Surg. 2019 Dec.

Abstract

Background: The Hawthorne effect or 'observer effect' describes a change in normal behaviour when individuals are aware they are being observed. This may have an impact on effect estimates in clinical trials. The purpose of this study was to determine if the Hawthorne effect had been recorded as a risk of bias in surgical studies.

Methods: A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses compliant literature search was conducted till March 2019. Eligible studies included those reporting or not reporting the Hawthorne effect in surgical studies from the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, BNI, HMIC, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar and OpenGrey. Two reviewers independently reviewed the papers, extracted data and appraised study methods using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale or the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data were analysed descriptively.

Results: A total of 842 papers were identified, of which 16 were eligible. Six (37%) observational studies were identified with the aim of measuring the Hawthorne effect on their outcome with five reporting that the Hawthorne effect was responsible for the improvements in outcomes and one reporting no change in outcome due to the Hawthorne effect. Ten (63%) studies were identified, of which eight used the Hawthorne effect as an explanation to improvements seen in the control group or their secondary outcomes and two to compare their results with other studies.

Conclusion: There is considerable between-study heterogeneity on how the Hawthorne effect relates to surgical outcomes. Further consideration on reporting and considering the importance of the Hawthorne effect in the design of surgical trials is warranted.

Keywords: Hawthorne effect; bias; observer effect; surgery; surgical studies.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Kompier MA. The Hawthorne effect is a myth, but what keeps the story going? Scand. J. Work Environ. Health 2006; 32: 402-12.
    1. Nguyen VN, Miller C, Sunderland J, McGuiness W. Understanding the Hawthorne effect in wound research - a scoping review. Int. Wound J. 2018; 15: 1010-24.
    1. Chiesa M, Hobbs S. Making sense of social research: how useful is the Hawthorne effect? Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 2008; 38: 67-74.
    1. McCambridge J, Kypri K. Can simply answering research questions change behaviour? Systematic review and meta analyses of brief alcohol intervention trials. PLoS One 2011; 6: e23748.
    1. Sedgwick P, Greenwood N. Understanding the Hawthorne effect. BMJ 2015; 351: h4672.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources