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
Review
. 2020 Apr 28;17(9):3069.
doi: 10.3390/ijerph17093069.

Dimensions of the Complexity of Health Interventions: What Are We Talking About? A Review

Affiliations
Review

Dimensions of the Complexity of Health Interventions: What Are We Talking About? A Review

Justine Trompette et al. Int J Environ Res Public Health. .

Abstract

Many recommendations and innovative approaches are available for the development and evaluation of complex health interventions. We investigated the dimensions of complexity described in health research and how these descriptions may affect the adopted research methodology (e.g., the choice of designs and methods). We used a mixed method approach to review the scientific literature evaluating complex interventions in the health field. Of 438 articles identified, 179 were subjected to descriptive analysis and 48 to content analysis. The three principal dimensions of complexity were: stakeholder characteristics, intervention multimodality and context. Recognition of such dimensions influenced the methodological choices made during evaluation of the interventions with their use of designs and methods, which aimed to address the complexity. We analysed not only how researchers view complexity but also the effects of such views on researcher practices. Our results highlight the need for clarification of what complexity means and to consider complexity when deciding how to evaluate research interventions.

Keywords: complex intervention; complexity; evaluation; health promotion; intervention.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PRISMA flow chart.

References

    1. Craig P., Dieppe P., Macintyre S., Michie S., Nazareth I., Petticrew M. Medical Research Council Guidance. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: The new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008;337:a1655. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1655. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hawe P., Shiell A., Riley T. Theorising interventions as events in systems. Am. J. Community Psychol. 2009;43:267–276. doi: 10.1007/s10464-009-9229-9. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Datta J., Petticrew M. Challenges to Evaluating Complex Interventions: A Content Analysis of Published Papers. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:568. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-568. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cambon L., Minary L., Ridde V., Alla F. Transferability of interventions in health education: A review. BMC Public Health. 2012;12:497. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-497. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wang S., Moss J.R., Hiller J.E. Applicability and transferability of interventions in evidence-based public health. Health Promot. Int. 2006;21:76–83. doi: 10.1093/heapro/dai025. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources