IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v34y2011i3p273-282.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evidence-based practices in the field of intellectual and developmental disabilities: An international consensus approach

Author

Listed:
  • Schalock, Robert L.
  • Verdugo, Miguel Angel
  • Gomez, Laura E.

Abstract

As evidence-based practices become increasingly advocated for and used in the human services field it is important to integrate issues raised by three perspectives on evidence: empirical-analytical, phenomenological-existential, and post-structural. This article presents and discusses an evidence-based conceptual model and measurement framework that integrates these three perspectives and results in: multiple perspectives on evidence-based practices that involve the individual, the organization, and society; and multiple interpretation guidelines related to the quality, robustness, and relevance of the evidence. The article concludes with a discussion of five issues that need to be addressed in the future conceptualization, measurement and application of evidence-based practices. These five are the need to: expand the concepts of internal and external validity, approach evidence-based practices from a systems perspective, integrate the various perspectives regarding evidence-based practices, develop and evaluate evidence-based practices within the context of best practices, and develop a set of guidelines related to the translation of evidence into practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Schalock, Robert L. & Verdugo, Miguel Angel & Gomez, Laura E., 2011. "Evidence-based practices in the field of intellectual and developmental disabilities: An international consensus approach," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 273-282, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:34:y:2011:i:3:p:273-282
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014971891000087X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schalock, Robert L. & Bonham, Gordon S. & Verdugo, Miguel A., 2008. "The conceptualization and measurement of quality of life: Implications for program planning and evaluation in the field of intellectual disabilities," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 181-190, May.
    2. Veerman, Jan W. & van Yperen, Tom A., 2007. "Degrees of freedom and degrees of certainty: A developmental model for the establishment of evidence-based youth care," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 212-221, May.
    3. Chaffin, Mark & Friedrich, Bill, 2004. "Evidence-based treatments in child abuse and neglect," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(11), pages 1097-1113, November.
    4. Chen, Huey T., 2010. "The bottom-up approach to integrative validity: A new perspective for program evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 205-214, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Iniesta, Julián & Verdugo, Miguel A. & Schalock, Robert L., 2023. "Organizational change and evidence-based practices in support services for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    2. Jos H M van Loon & Remco Mostert, 2020. "Guidelines in Supporting People with Intellectual Disabilities.It’s all About Values," Global Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disabilities, Juniper Publishers Inc., vol. 7(1), pages 13-17, October.
    3. Miguel A. Verdugo & Virginia Aguayo & Victor B. Arias & Laura García-Domínguez, 2020. "A Systematic Review of the Assessment of Support Needs in People with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-26, December.
    4. Robert L. Schalock & Ruth Luckasson & Karrie A. Shogren, 2020. "Going beyond Environment to Context: Leveraging the Power of Context to Produce Change," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-14, March.
    5. Gómez, Laura E. & Verdugo, Miguel Ángel & Arias, Benito & Navas, Patricia & Schalock, Robert L., 2013. "The development and use of Provider Profiles at the organizational and systems level," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 17-26.
    6. Schalock, Robert L. & Lee, Tim & Verdugo, Miguel & Swart, Kees & Claes, Claudia & van Loon, Jos & Lee, Chun-Shin, 2014. "An evidence-based approach to organization evaluation and change in human service organizations evaluation and program planning," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 110-118.
    7. Chris Swerts & Laura E. Gómez & Jessica Maeyer & Goedele Nil & Wouter Vanderplasschen, 2022. "Development of the Quality of Life in Youth Services Scale (QOLYSS): Content-Related Validity Evidence Based on Adolescents’ and Expert Reviewers’ Perspectives," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 17(2), pages 593-612, April.
    8. van Loon, Jos H.M. & Bonham, Gordon S. & Peterson, Dale D. & Schalock, Robert L. & Claes, Claudia & Decramer, Adelien E.M., 2013. "The use of evidence-based outcomes in systems and organizations providing services and supports to persons with intellectual disability," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 80-87.
    9. Claes, Claudia & van Loon, Jos & Vandevelde, Stijn & Schalock, Robert, 2015. "An integrative approach to evidence based practices," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 132-136.
    10. Laura Gómez & Elsa Peña & Benito Arias & Miguel Verdugo, 2016. "Impact of Individual and Organizational Variables on Quality of Life," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 125(2), pages 649-664, January.
    11. Mark Rickinson & Connie Cirkony & Lucas Walsh & Jo Gleeson & Mandy Salisbury & Annette Boaz, 2021. "Insights from a cross-sector review on how to conceptualise the quality of use of research evidence," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, December.
    12. Laura E. Gómez & Asunción Monsalve & Mª Lucía Morán & Mª Ángeles Alcedo & Marco Lombardi & Robert L. Schalock, 2020. "Measurable Indicators of CRPD for People with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities within the Quality of Life Framework," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-24, July.
    13. María Fernández & Miguel Ángel Verdugo & Laura E. Gómez & Virginia Aguayo & Benito Arias, 2018. "Core Indicators to Assess Quality of Life in Population with Brain Injury," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 137(2), pages 813-828, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Archibald, Thomas, 2015. "“They Just Know”: The epistemological politics of “evidence-based” non-formal education," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 137-148.
    2. Urban, Jennifer Brown & Hargraves, Monica & Trochim, William M., 2014. "Evolutionary Evaluation: Implications for evaluators, researchers, practitioners, funders and the evidence-based program mandate," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 127-139.
    3. Veerman, Jan W. & De Meyer, Ronald E., 2015. "Consistency of outcomes of home-based family treatment in The Netherlands as an indicator of effectiveness," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 113-119.
    4. Debra Strong & Russell Cole & Angela D’Angelo & Juliette Henke & Yange Xue, "undated". "RPG Child and Family Outcomes: Fifth Annual Report to Congress," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 7bfa5cccd7a84c6ba26691d9b, Mathematica Policy Research.
    5. Horwitz, Sarah McCue & Hurlburt, Michael S. & Goldhaber-Fiebert, Jeremy D. & Palinkas, Lawrence A. & Rolls-Reutz, Jennifer & Zhang, JinJin & Fisher, Emily & Landsverk, John, 2014. "Exploration and adoption of evidence-based practice by US child welfare agencies," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 147-152.
    6. Brady, Bernadine & Canavan, John & Redmond, Susan, 2016. "Bridging the gap: Using Veerman and Van Yperen’s (2007) framework to conceptualise and develop evidence informed practice in an Irish youth work organisation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 128-133.
    7. Pearl Anne Ante-Testard & Francois Rerolle & Anna T. Nguyen & Sania Ashraf & Sarker Masud Parvez & Abu Mohammed Naser & Tarik Benmarhnia & Mahbubur Rahman & Stephen P. Luby & Jade Benjamin-Chung & Ben, 2024. "WASH interventions and child diarrhea at the interface of climate and socioeconomic position in Bangladesh," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    8. Leathers, Sonya J. & McMeel, Lorri S. & Prabhughate, Abhijit & Atkins, Marc S., 2009. "Trends in child welfare's focus on children's mental health and services from 1980-2004," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 445-450, April.
    9. Goldberg, Jessica & Bumgarner, Erin & Jacobs, Francine, 2016. "Measuring program- and individual-level fidelity in a home visiting program for adolescent parents," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 163-173.
    10. Nele Van Hecke & Claudia Claes & Wouter Vanderplasschen & Jessica De Maeyer & Nico De Witte & Stijn Vandevelde, 2018. "Conceptualisation and Measurement of Quality of Life Based on Schalock and Verdugo’s Model: A Cross-Disciplinary Review of the Literature," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 335-351, May.
    11. McBeath, Bowen & Briggs, Harold E. & Aisenberg, Eugene, 2009. "The role of child welfare managers in promoting agency performance through experimentation," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 112-118, January.
    12. Mersky, Joshua P. & Janczewski, Colleen, 2013. "Adult well-being of foster care alumni: Comparisons to other child welfare recipients and a non-child welfare sample in a high-risk, urban setting," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 367-376.
    13. Barbee, Anita P. & Christensen, Dana & Antle, Becky & Wandersman, Abraham & Cahn, Katharine, 2011. "Successful adoption and implementation of a comprehensive casework practice model in a public child welfare agency: Application of the Getting to Outcomes (GTO) model," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 622-633, May.
    14. Veerman, Jan W. & van Yperen, Tom A., 2007. "Degrees of freedom and degrees of certainty: A developmental model for the establishment of evidence-based youth care," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 212-221, May.
    15. Pedro Gerber Machado & Arnaldo Walter & Michelle Cristina Picoli & Cristina Gerber João, 2017. "Potential impacts on local quality of life due to sugarcane expansion: a case study based on panel data analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 2069-2092, October.
    16. Rogers-Brown, Jessica S. & Self-Brown, Shannon & Romano, Elisa & Weeks, Erin & Thompson, William W. & Whitaker, Daniel J., 2020. "Behavior change across implementations of the SafeCare model in real world settings," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    17. Gómez, Laura E. & Verdugo, Miguel Ángel & Arias, Benito & Navas, Patricia & Schalock, Robert L., 2013. "The development and use of Provider Profiles at the organizational and systems level," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 17-26.
    18. Orlando, Laura & Barkan, Susan & Brennan, Kathryn, 2019. "Designing an evidence-based intervention for parents involved with child welfare," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 1-1.
    19. Chen, Huey T., 2016. "Interfacing theories of program with theories of evaluation for advancing evaluation practice: Reductionism, systems thinking, and pragmatic synthesis," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 109-118.
    20. Melissa Cowart-Osborne & Matthew Jackson & Elizabeth Chege & Evander Baker & Daniel Whitaker & Shannon Self-Brown, 2014. "Technology-Based Innovations in Child Maltreatment Prevention Programs: Examples from SafeCare®," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-14, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:34:y:2011:i:3:p:273-282. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.