Evidence-Based Methodology - Revision history

ShoaibIqbal at 01:54, 22 July 2026

2026-07-22T01:54:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:54, 22 July 2026
Line 11:		Line 11:
	Two honest caveats belong here, and naming them is itself part of the methodology. The Wingman-Connect trial is a randomized design and carries strong evidentiary weight, but it comes from a single research programme. The McNeill et al. study is a single-cohort, pre-post design with no control group, a weaker tier of evidence than a trial; its conclusion about curriculum should be read as a prompt for further testing, not as settled fact. Grading the strength of evidence, rather than treating all findings as equal, is not a footnote to evidence-based methodology. It is the methodology.		Two honest caveats belong here, and naming them is itself part of the methodology. The Wingman-Connect trial is a randomized design and carries strong evidentiary weight, but it comes from a single research programme. The McNeill et al. study is a single-cohort, pre-post design with no control group, a weaker tier of evidence than a trial; its conclusion about curriculum should be read as a prompt for further testing, not as settled fact. Grading the strength of evidence, rather than treating all findings as equal, is not a footnote to evidence-based methodology. It is the methodology.

	==== '''Context: Evidence-Based Methodology in Schools''' ====		=== '''Context: Evidence-Based Methodology in Schools''' ===
	Schools need a way to judge whether a claimed evidence base actually meets the standard, not just whether it sounds plausible. Santiago-Rosario et al. (2023) provide exactly this for one common schoolwide framework, concluding after systematic review that "PBIS can be designated an evidence-based practice for reducing exclusionary discipline and improving social, emotional, and behavioral outcomes" (p. 1). That is a formal grading of evidence strength, not a general endorsement. The same standard applies to network-based prevention: Wyman (2014) reports that "training for high school student peer leaders to prepare them to modify norms through their natural social networks (Sources of Strength) has increased schoolwide help-seeking acceptability, coping norms, and engagement of adults to help suicidal peers" (p. S254) — a specific, tested claim, not an assumption. A school adopting either framework should expect this same level of documented evidence, not take effectiveness on faith.		Schools need a way to judge whether a claimed evidence base actually meets the standard, not just whether it sounds plausible. Santiago-Rosario et al. (2023) provide exactly this for one common schoolwide framework, concluding after systematic review that "PBIS can be designated an evidence-based practice for reducing exclusionary discipline and improving social, emotional, and behavioral outcomes" (p. 1). That is a formal grading of evidence strength, not a general endorsement. The same standard applies to network-based prevention: Wyman (2014) reports that "training for high school student peer leaders to prepare them to modify norms through their natural social networks (Sources of Strength) has increased schoolwide help-seeking acceptability, coping norms, and engagement of adults to help suicidal peers" (p. S254) — a specific, tested claim, not an assumption. A school adopting either framework should expect this same level of documented evidence, not take effectiveness on faith.

	==== '''Context: Evidence-Based Methodology among Remote Workers in IT and Technology''' ====		=== '''Context: Evidence-Based Methodology among Remote Workers in IT and Technology''' ===
	No network-health programme for IT or software teams has been tested with a trial design comparable to Wingman-Connect's, so evidence-based methodology here means being honest about what standard of proof exists rather than borrowing one from elsewhere. The closest available evidence is observational rather than experimental. Yang et al. (2022) used a large natural experiment, not a randomized trial, to show that "firm-wide remote work caused the collaboration network of workers to become more static and siloed, with fewer bridges between disparate parts" (Abstract). That finding is credible and large-scale, but it documents an effect of remote work, not the impact of any specific intervention designed to counter it. Applying a network-health programme to distributed IT teams without testing it against this same bar — a comparison condition, a measured mechanism, replication beyond one firm — would be exactly the kind of unevidenced adoption this finding warns against.		No network-health programme for IT or software teams has been tested with a trial design comparable to Wingman-Connect's, so evidence-based methodology here means being honest about what standard of proof exists rather than borrowing one from elsewhere. The closest available evidence is observational rather than experimental. Yang et al. (2022) used a large natural experiment, not a randomized trial, to show that "firm-wide remote work caused the collaboration network of workers to become more static and siloed, with fewer bridges between disparate parts" (Abstract). That finding is credible and large-scale, but it documents an effect of remote work, not the impact of any specific intervention designed to counter it. Applying a network-health programme to distributed IT teams without testing it against this same bar — a comparison condition, a measured mechanism, replication beyond one firm — would be exactly the kind of unevidenced adoption this finding warns against.

	==== '''References''' ====		=== '''References''' ===
	McNeill, C., George, N., Stephens, U., & Walker, T. (2024). Teaching evidence-based practice to MSN, DNP and PhD students: Lessons learned. ''ABNFF Journal, 1''(1), 53–60.		McNeill, C., George, N., Stephens, U., & Walker, T. (2024). Teaching evidence-based practice to MSN, DNP and PhD students: Lessons learned. ''ABNFF Journal, 1''(1), 53–60.

ShoaibIqbal: new writeup

2026-07-22T01:49:43Z

new writeup

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:49, 22 July 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:

	~~=== Summary ===~~
	[[File:18 Evidence of Impact.mp4\|thumb\|Dr Peter Wyman, in interview with Tim McGowan, says that rigorously tested programs that follow key findings of evidence offer our best chances of success in prevention. ]]		[[File:18 Evidence of Impact.mp4\|thumb\|Dr Peter Wyman, in interview with Tim McGowan, says that rigorously tested programs that follow key findings of evidence offer our best chances of success in prevention. ]]
	~~Social Network Health approaches require~~ an ~~ongoing~~ commitment to ~~follow documented evidence of impact by studying research and implementation~~ in ~~the field of preventative mental health care~~.		Evidence-based methodology means treating a programme's impact as a question to test, not an assumption to repeat. A design can look sound on paper and still fail once measured, so the commitment is to keep measuring, not to stop once a plausible theory is in place.

	~~=== References~~ and ~~Notes ===~~		Wyman et al. (2020) built this commitment into the Wingman-Connect trial from the outset. The study was not a simple before-and-after check: it was "conducted from October 2017 to October 2019" as a trial with an active comparison condition, and its stated aims went beyond outcomes alone. "The primary hypothesis tested was that Wingman-Connect would reduce suicidal ideation, depression symptoms, and job-related problems. A secondary objective was testing the guiding network health theoretical model" (Methods). That second aim matters: the trial was designed to test whether the proposed mechanism was real, not only whether the numbers moved.

			The results honoured that distinction. Rather than stopping at "it worked," the authors traced why: "participants' perceptions of being embedded in a more cohesive, healthy class accounted for significant portions of Wingman-Connect's impact on reducing suicidal ideation and depression symptoms" (Results). Evidence-based methodology, on this model, means testing the theory of change itself, not just its endpoint.

	~~'''Effect~~ of the ~~Wingman~~-~~Connect Upstream Suicide Prevention Program for Air Force Personnel in Training~~. ~~A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial'''~~		This same commitment shows up in an unrelated setting, evidencing that it is a methodology and not a single result. McNeill et al. (2024) evaluated a graduate nursing course on evidence-based practice using a validated instrument before and after teaching, and reported that "the results indicated a significant difference pre vs post course in the areas of EBP use... EBP Skill... and EBP Communication." But they did not stop at the positive result: the same data showed that "22 out of the 24 students that reported feeling overwhelmed by the course were MSN students," and the authors concluded plainly that "the facilitation, evaluation, and redesign of EBP curriculum need to be informed by data gathered from formal assessments." A programme that works overall can still surface a problem in the same measurement; evidence-based methodology means acting on both findings, not just the favourable one.

	~~'''JAMA Open Network~~, ~~October~~, ~~2020'''~~		Two honest caveats belong here, and naming them is itself part of the methodology. The Wingman-Connect trial is a randomized design and carries strong evidentiary weight, but it comes from a single research programme. The McNeill et al. study is a single-cohort, pre-post design with no control group, a weaker tier of evidence than a trial; its conclusion about curriculum should be read as a prompt for further testing, not as settled fact. Grading the strength of evidence, rather than treating all findings as equal, is not a footnote to evidence-based methodology. It is the methodology.

	'''~~Research Outcomes –~~ Evidence Based ~~Key Findings include:~~'''		==== '''Context: Evidence-Based Methodology in Schools''' ====
			Schools need a way to judge whether a claimed evidence base actually meets the standard, not just whether it sounds plausible. Santiago-Rosario et al. (2023) provide exactly this for one common schoolwide framework, concluding after systematic review that "PBIS can be designated an evidence-based practice for reducing exclusionary discipline and improving social, emotional, and behavioral outcomes" (p. 1). That is a formal grading of evidence strength, not a general endorsement. The same standard applies to network-based prevention: Wyman (2014) reports that "training for high school student peer leaders to prepare them to modify norms through their natural social networks (Sources of Strength) has increased schoolwide help-seeking acceptability, coping norms, and engagement of adults to help suicidal peers" (p. S254) — a specific, tested claim, not an assumption. A school adopting either framework should expect this same level of documented evidence, not take effectiveness on faith.

	* Increased class cohesion, ~~morale~~, ~~positive bonds~~, and ~~acceptability~~ of ~~help seeking~~		==== '''Context: Evidence-Based Methodology among Remote Workers in IT and Technology''' ====
	* Reduction in suicide risks scores, ~~depression~~, ~~and reactivity to anger~~		No network-health programme for IT or software teams has been tested with a trial design comparable to Wingman-Connect's, so evidence-based methodology here means being honest about what standard of proof exists rather than borrowing one from elsewhere. The closest available evidence is observational rather than experimental. Yang et al. (2022) used a large natural experiment, not a randomized trial, to show that "firm-wide remote work caused the collaboration network of workers to become more static and siloed, with fewer bridges between disparate parts" (Abstract). That finding is credible and large-scale, but it documents an effect of remote work, not the impact of any specific intervention designed to counter it. Applying a network-health programme to distributed IT teams without testing it against this same bar — a comparison condition, a measured mechanism, replication beyond one firm — would be exactly the kind of unevidenced adoption this finding warns against.
	* Nearly 50% reduction in occupational impairment (corrective training, ~~negative counseling)~~

	'''~~Measurable Impact on both Protective Factors~~ and ~~Risk Factors~~'''		==== '''References''' ====
			McNeill, C., George, N., Stephens, U., & Walker, T. (2024). Teaching evidence-based practice to MSN, DNP and PhD students: Lessons learned. ''ABNFF Journal, 1''(1), 53–60.

	~~Wingman~~-~~Connect was tested using the~~ ''~~'gold~~-~~standard research design with Airmen in Training~~''~~' from 2017-2019 (randomized controlled trial). Training showed statistically significant increases in group and individual level protective factors~~, ~~as well as reductions in negative outcomes including and depression and suicide risk~~.		Santiago-Rosario, M. R., McIntosh, K., Izzard, S., Cohen Lissman, D., & Calhoun, E. (2023). ''Is positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) an evidence-based practice?'' Center on PBIS, University of Oregon.

	~~Social Science & Medicine Social Science &~~ Medicine ~~296~~ (~~2022~~) ~~114737~~		Wyman, P. A. (2014). Developmental approach to prevent adolescent suicides: Research pathways to effective upstream preventive interventions. ''American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 47''(3, Suppl. 2), S251–S256. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2014.05.039</nowiki>

	~~'''~~Wingman-Connect ~~Program increases social integration~~ for Air Force personnel ~~at elevated suicide risk~~: ~~Social network analysis of a~~ cluster ~~RCT~~'''		Wyman, P. A., Pisani, A. R., Brown, C. H., Yates, B., Morgan-DeVelder, L., Schmeelk-Cone, K., Gibbons, R. D., Caine, E. D., Petrova, M., Neal-Walden, T., Linkh, D. J., Matteson, A., Simonson, J., & Pflanz, S. E. (2020). Effect of the Wingman-Connect upstream suicide prevention program for Air Force personnel in training: A cluster randomized clinical trial. ''JAMA Network Open, 3''(11), e2022532. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.22532</nowiki>

	~~The current attention on the detection and treatment of suicidal military members is necessary~~, ~~but ultimately insufficient to meet the needs of many suicidal service members~~. ~~Results from our study suggest that the status quo progression for many service members at elevated suicide risk is one of worsening disconnection~~, ~~evidenced by the trajectory of declining valued connections found in the active control condition~~.		Yang, L., Holtz, D., Jaffe, S., Suri, S., Sinha, S., Weston, J., Joyce, C., Shah, N., Sherman, K., Hecht, B., & Teevan, J. (2022). The effects of remote work on collaboration among information workers. ''Nature Human Behaviour, 6'', 43–54. <nowiki>https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01196-4</nowiki>

	~~Evidence based practice is defined as a deliberate and conscientious approach to problems olving within clinical practice~~. ~~An evidence-based approach embodies the best evidence from well designed studies while taking into consideration patient values, preferences~~, ~~and a clinician’s expertise in making decisions regarding patient’s care (Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt~~, ~~2019).~~

	~~Melnyk et al~~. (2012) describes evidence based practice (EBP) as a clinical decision-making tool that improves clinical outcomes. EBP has a proven track record of improving quality of care and patient outcomes (McGinty and Anderson, 2008). Evidence-based practice as a problem-solving approach fits with Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommendations that all health professionals translate the research into practice (Institute of Medicine, ~~2003)~~.

	~~It is also important for faculty to incorporate quality improvement and evidence-based practice in the facilitation~~, ~~evaluation~~, ~~and redesign of curriculum~~. Knowledge gained from quality improvement initiatives and evidence-based assessments of teaching allow for informed decisions that are based on quantitative and qualitative data thus providing a better assessment of teaching effectiveness and will serve as a consistent guide for improvement and a measure of teaching success.

	~~McNeill~~, C., ~~George~~, N., ~~Stephens~~, U., & ~~Walker~~, T. (~~2024~~). ~~Teaching Evidence-Based Practice to MSN, DNP and PhD students: Lessons Learned~~. ''~~ABNFF Journal''~~, ''~~1''(1), 53–60.~~

	~~'''This is where the book ends maturity model, pre and post should go.'''~~

	~~'''PBIS:'''~~

	~~'''Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) is a widely implemented framework for promoting positive school systems and fostering students' social~~, ~~emotional, behavioral, and mental health~~.~~'''~~

	~~'''~~<nowiki>https://~~cdn~~.~~prod~~.~~website~~-~~files.com/5d3725188825e071f1670246/651c4d7d5174726ec6da1d86_Is%20Positive%20Behavioral%20Interventions%20and%20Supports%20(PBIS)%20an%20Evidence~~-~~Based%20Practice.pdf~~</nowiki>~~'''~~

Richbodo at 23:47, 6 August 2024

2024-08-06T23:47:32Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:47, 7 August 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:

	=== Summary ===		=== Summary ===
			[[File:18 Evidence of Impact.mp4\|thumb\|Dr Peter Wyman, in interview with Tim McGowan, says that rigorously tested programs that follow key findings of evidence offer our best chances of success in prevention. ]]
			Social Network Health approaches require an ongoing commitment to follow documented evidence of impact by studying research and implementation in the field of preventative mental health care.

	Social Network Health approaches require an ongoing commitment to follow documented evidence of impact by studying research and implementation in the field of preventative mental health care.

	~~[https://docs.google.com/document/d/14b0PeP_-de2VKRxAYD3dFY7XX7wYgcm3OFONjOBuZbw/edit?disco=AAABScJhsYg Google doc comment with Peter and Tim]~~

	=== References and Notes ===		=== References and Notes ===

Richbodo: add comment from peters interview

2024-07-24T19:14:10Z

add comment from peters interview

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:14, 25 July 2024
Line 2:		Line 2:
	=== Summary ===		=== Summary ===



			Social Network Health approaches require an ongoing commitment to follow documented evidence of impact by studying research and implementation in the field of preventative mental health care.

			[https://docs.google.com/document/d/14b0PeP_-de2VKRxAYD3dFY7XX7wYgcm3OFONjOBuZbw/edit?disco=AAABScJhsYg Google doc comment with Peter and Tim]

	=== References and Notes ===		=== References and Notes ===

Richbodo: add refs and notes for evidence based methodology

2024-07-24T03:06:12Z

add refs and notes for evidence based methodology

New page

=== Summary ===

=== References and Notes ===

'''Effect of the Wingman-Connect Upstream Suicide Prevention Program for Air Force Personnel in Training. A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial'''

'''JAMA Open Network, October, 2020'''

'''Research Outcomes – Evidence Based Key Findings include:'''

* Increased class cohesion, morale, positive bonds, and acceptability of help seeking
* Reduction in suicide risks scores, depression, and reactivity to anger
* Nearly 50% reduction in occupational impairment (corrective training, negative counseling)

'''Measurable Impact on both Protective Factors and Risk Factors'''

Wingman-Connect was tested using the '''gold-standard research design with Airmen in Training''' from 2017-2019 (randomized controlled trial). Training showed statistically significant increases in group and individual level protective factors, as well as reductions in negative outcomes including and depression and suicide risk.

Social Science & Medicine Social Science & Medicine 296 (2022) 114737

'''Wingman-Connect Program increases social integration for Air Force personnel at elevated suicide risk: Social network analysis of a cluster RCT'''

The current attention on the detection and treatment of suicidal military members is necessary, but ultimately insufficient to meet the needs of many suicidal service members. Results from our study suggest that the status quo progression for many service members at elevated suicide risk is one of worsening disconnection, evidenced by the trajectory of declining valued connections found in the active control condition.

Evidence based practice is defined as a deliberate and conscientious approach to problems olving within clinical practice. An evidence-based approach embodies the best evidence from well designed studies while taking into consideration patient values, preferences, and a clinician’s expertise in making decisions regarding patient’s care (Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt, 2019).

Melnyk et al. (2012) describes evidence based practice (EBP) as a clinical decision-making tool that improves clinical outcomes. EBP has a proven track record of improving quality of care and patient outcomes (McGinty and Anderson, 2008). Evidence-based practice as a problem-solving approach fits with Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommendations that all health professionals translate the research into practice (Institute of Medicine, 2003).

It is also important for faculty to incorporate quality improvement and evidence-based practice in the facilitation, evaluation, and redesign of curriculum. Knowledge gained from quality improvement initiatives and evidence-based assessments of teaching allow for informed decisions that are based on quantitative and qualitative data thus providing a better assessment of teaching effectiveness and will serve as a consistent guide for improvement and a measure of teaching success.

McNeill, C., George, N., Stephens, U., & Walker, T. (2024). Teaching Evidence-Based Practice to MSN, DNP and PhD students: Lessons Learned. ''ABNFF Journal'', ''1''(1), 53–60.

'''This is where the book ends maturity model, pre and post should go.'''

'''PBIS:'''

'''Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) is a widely implemented framework for promoting positive school systems and fostering students' social, emotional, behavioral, and mental health.'''

'''<nowiki>https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/5d3725188825e071f1670246/651c4d7d5174726ec6da1d86_Is%20Positive%20Behavioral%20Interventions%20and%20Supports%20(PBIS)%20an%20Evidence-Based%20Practice.pdf</nowiki>'''