Each Practice Guide is based on a new systematic review of existing evidence, that explores what works, for whom, and in what context, which is in turn translated into actionable Key principles and Recommendations for local leaders:
- Key Principles: These summarise the needs, experiences and preferences of families in the UK, as well as evidence on the implementation and design of services and interventions. Key principles draw on qualitative research, findings from implementation evaluations, and the common features of effective interventions, all sourced from the systematic review. These Key principles create the conditions for successful delivery of the Recommendations, and ensure accessible, acceptable and effective interventions can be delivered.
- Recommendations: These summarise the best-evidenced interventions for improving outcomes among families. These are mainly drawn from robust impact evaluations of interventions sourced via the systematic review. We only make recommendations where at least one rigorous impact evaluation
An impact evaluation provides information about the changes that can be attributed to an intervention, programme or service. These changes can be negative and positive, intended and unintended, or direct and indirect. Impact evaluation helps researchers to answer questions about what works, for whom, and why. has evidenced that the intervention achieves positive outcomes for either kinship carers or children and young people, either in the UK, or in countries like the UK.
Local authority leaders who are already applying the Key principles and Recommendations found in the Practice Guides, can use the guides to fine-tune their services. Each Practice Guide has supporting resources designed to aid ongoing implementation.
Practice Guide recommendations: Evidence scoring system
For recommendations, Practice Guides identify the strength of the evidence of types of interventions using the following scoring system:
Strong evidence
This rating is given if: the evidence is from a meta-analysis or a narrative synthesis of at least two randomised controlled
A study design used to evaluate the impact of an intervention on target populations by assigning participants to one of two groups: the intervention/experimental group (i.e., the group receiving the intervention that is being evaluated), and the control or comparison group (i.e., the group receiving an alternative intervention or no intervention). trials or quasi-experimental
A study design used to evaluate the causal impact of an intervention on target populations without random assignment of participants to intervention and control groups. studies that were conducted in the UK or comparable high-income country; and have scored low on risk of bias assessment
As part of the systematic review process, the quality of each study included in the review is assessed using tools such as the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. This helps researchers to understand whether the methods used in the study are transparent. Checking the transparency of the methods used allows researchers to judge the trustworthiness, reliability and relevance of the findings from each study., with a minimum sample size of 20 in each group (the intervention and comparison group); and demonstrates effectiveness of the intervention(s).
Good evidence
This rating is given if: the evidence is from a meta-analysis or a narrative synthesis
Narrative synthesis is an approach for analysing and summarising results from multiple studies using texts and words, and helps to provide an overall assessment of the strength of the evidence about the effectiveness of a specific intervention(s). of at least two randomised controlled trials and/or quasi-experimental studies that were conducted in the UK or a comparable high-income country; and have scored at least moderate on risk of bias assessment, with at least 20 participants in the intervention group and less or more than 20 participants in the comparison group; and demonstrates efficacy of the intervention(s).
Promising evidence
This rating is given if: the evidence is from one randomised controlled trial or quasi-experimental study that was conducted in the UK or a comparable high-income country; and has scored low or moderate on risk of bias assessment, with less or more than 20 participants in each group (the intervention and comparison group); and demonstrates efficacy of the intervention(s).
Each individual guide contains more information about the strength of the evidence underlying its recommendations.
