research expertıse > systematıc revıews of evıdence
Evaluation provides the evidence on the effectiveness of a program. However, the quality of evidence matters. In our systematic review and meta-analysis studies, we form a catalog of evidence-based practices to document
Evidence quality rating system
In order to identify best evidence-based practices, evaluation studies of each program can be rated in terms of evidence quality. The quality can be determined by the evaluation design (e.g., randomized trial, quasi-experimental), internal validity to determine causal effects (e.g., existence of comparison groups, equivalence of intervention and comparison groups at baseline), generalization of results to other populations and settings, reliability and validity of data on outcomes, and validity of statistical conclusions (e.g., statistical adjustment for selected measures, handling missing data) (for only the quantitative evaluation studies).
An evaluation study with a high rating means that the study is well designed to estimate the effectiveness of the intervention. A moderate rating means that the study is well designed but has some weaknesses. A low rating means that one cannot know if changes in outcomes are due to the intervention or other factors.
Advanced Data Analysis
Systematic Reviews of Evidence
Towards optimized effectiveness of organizational training programs: A meta-analysis study on delivery features
In this meta-analysis study, we investigate under which delivery features (training method, training type, intensity, duration, presence of feedback and practice) organizational training programs targeting employee well-being and success achieve the most effective results.
Manuscript under review
Brief social-psychological interventions to increase academic
achievement: A systematic review
This review paper in preparation systematically compares the effectiveness of brief experimental studies to increase academic achievement and mental task performance across different age groups, intervention types, and types of gap addressed (racial, gender).