Moving beyond randomised controlled trials in the evaluation of compulsory community treatment: Beyond trials in community treatment evaluation

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


  • Craig Duncan
  • Scott Weich
  • Graham Moon
  • Liz Twigg
  • Kamaldeep Bhui
  • David Crepaz-Keay
  • Jason Madan
  • Helen Parsons
  • Swaran Singh

Colleges, School and Institutes

External organisations

  • University of Portsmouth
  • Sheffield University
  • University of Southampton
  • Queen Mary University of London
  • Mental Health Foundation
  • The University of Warwick


Compulsory community treatment for people with severe mental illness remains controversial due to conflicting research evidence. Recently, there have been challenges to the conventional view that trials-based evidence should take precedence. This paper adds to these challenges in three ways. First, it emphasises the need for critiques of trials to engage with conceptual and not just technical issues. Second, it develops a critique of trials centred on both how we can have knowledge and what it is we can have knowledge of. Third, it uses this critique to develop a research strategy that capitalises on the information in large-scale datasets.


Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
Early online date29 Jul 2019
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 29 Jul 2019


  • clinical effectiveness, compulsory community treatment, mental health policy, randomized controlled trials, realist evaluation