Readiness for a trial: Challenges evaluating interventions at the intersection of domestic abuse and substance use

Le résumé fourni par la source

Although the association between substance use and domestic abuse is well documented, integrated program responses to promote the safety of families living with both issues are relatively rare. One example is KODY—an innovative intersectoral program designed and trialled in Victoria, Australia. This article discusses the challenges of evaluating an innovative program, including evaluation design, data collection, and the complexities that arise for multi-component programs bridging separate services and sectors. Findings of a summative evaluation of the KODY program, primarily aimed at evaluating improvements in the safety and well-being of children over a two-and-a-half-year period from inception are presented. Due to small sample sizes, the original quasi-experimental research design was modified to a convergent mixed-methods approach incorporating a triangulated analysis of quantitative and qualitative data. Fathers were assessed on several self-reported psychometric measures to determine parenting attitudes that directly impact children. Other sources of data included: interview data with fathers who entered the program due to their combined substance use and abusive behaviour; interview and focus group data from program professionals; and professional assessments of fathers’ program outcomes. While outcomes data were limited due to small sample sizes, there was some evidence that outcomes for children improved. The evaluation of cross-sectoral interventions presents complexities, involving the integration of diverse programs, goals, intervention approaches, and differing disciplinary perspectives. While it is important to generate evidence to inform the development of innovative programs, these complexities lead programs to a longer development trajectory before definitive and generalisable outcomes can be established.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.