Hide Main content block

Home Page News Section

Home Page News Section

  • Towards a more methodical use of protocols in systematic reviews

    Join researchers and policy makers from different fields at the Global Evidence SummitGlobal Evidence Summit in September, to get answers to questions like: How do we use study protocols in a review? When I have found a study protocol for my systematic review should I consider it an included study, a companion document to an included study, an ongoing study, awaiting classification, or excluded? If there is data available, can I use it? If so, how? How do I report protocols within the review?
    Read more

     
     
     
  • Consumer involvement – all talk and no action?

    Why attend the Global Evidence Summit in Capetown? To learn from social science researchers about topics like the importance of involving consumers in research. Today it is considered very important to involve consumers in the research process, not only in primary research but also in systematic reviews. Consumers are recipients of healthcare or social care, they are patients or clients, but may also be those who have a family experience of a condition or topic under consideration, or someone who is a formal representative of a consumer group.
    Read more

     
  • Podcast: 4 useful principles for evidence-based policy & practice

    Howard White, CEO of the Campbell Collaboration, was recently interviewed by Andy Feldman at the Brookings Institute in Washington, DC. Part 1 of the interview on useful principles for evidence-based policy and practice presented four principles: 1. Use the right evidence to answer the right question, 2. Don’t rely on single studies, 3. Context matters for transferring evidence, and 4. Evidence-based policy is not a blueprint (aka cookie cutter) approach.
    Read more

     
     
     
  • New Editor in Chief for the Campbell Collaboration

    We are pleased to announce the appointment of Dr Vivian Welch as the new Editor in Chief of the Campbell Collaboration. Vivian brings 20 years of systematic review experience with both Cochrane and Campbell. She is Campbell's first full-time Editor in Chief.
    Read more

 
 
 
 

Home Page Latest Campbell Evidence

Latest Campbell Evidence

  • Face-to-face Restorative Justice Conferences (RJCs) are cost-effective in reducing reoffending and increasing victim satisfaction. Compared with standard criminal justice,usually through the courts, face-to-face RJCs reduce the frequency of subsequent crimes among offenders.

  • Effective multi-component classroom management programmes seem to improve student behaviour in the classroom but further research is needed. Effective classroom management is a preventive approach which establishes a positive classroom environment in which the teacher focuses on appropriate student behaviour.

  • Drug Courts monitor drug-involved offenders’ abstinence from drug use through frequent drug testing and compliance with drug treatment programs. These courts are effective in reducing future offending and drug use (recidivism) for adults, but not for juveniles.

  • Teen pregnancy prevention programs are mostly ineffective. Multi-component programs may work. Teen pregnancy prevention programs aim to reduce teenage pregnancy by promoting abstinence and using contraception.

Home Page Featured Review

 

Featured Review

‘Effects of Payment for Environmental Services (PES) on Deforestation and Poverty in Low and Middle Income Countries: A Systematic Review' by Cyrus Samii, Matthew Lisiecki, Parashar Kulkarni, Laura Paler, and Larry Chavis.

In honor of World Environment Day on June 5th we are featuring our review studying the effects of programmes for reducing deforestation. Forests store carbon, which helps mitigate the effect of carbon emissions. However, the amount of forest cover is declining at a rate of over seven million hectares a year. Payment for environmental services (PES) are voluntary contracts to supply an environmental service in exchange for payment. In this review, the service is the maintenance or rehabilitation of natural forests.

The review examines how these programmes affect deforestation, factors affecting programme effectiveness, and whether PES should also aim to reduce poverty. The authors conclude that payment for environmental services programmes have only modest effects on deforestation and are not cost-effective. PES programmes are more likely to attract wealthier farmers, and are less effective in poor areas. 

 

Read More

Contact Us

  • P.O. Box 4404, Nydalen,
    N-0403 Oslo, Norway
  • (+47) 23 25 50 00
  • (+47) 23 25 50 10
  • Web: tkristiansen@campbellcollaboration.org
  •  info@campbellcollaboration.org

 Donate to Campbell

News and Jobs