intervention programs. However, if groups are interClinical medicine has striven to become evidencevened upon to identify and treat those at risk of a based, increasingly through the use of randomized, disease, the so-called ` high-risk approach,’ ’ this may clinical trials. A similar demand has been placed on still be a community trial, as the target remains the public health, i.e. to develop empiric proof that intersocial group, with results described on a group, not ventions at the group or population level are eVective. individual, basis. This has led to documentation of many positive results, The mixed results of community intervention trials including simple interventions like improving water to reduce cardiovascular risk have raised questions quality, immunizations, and use of nutritional additives about how such interventions cause (or fail to cause) such as uoride, iodine, and Vitamin D. More recent population-wide risk reduction. This has led to the interventions at the community level to control cardioconcept of the ` black box’ ’ of community intervention.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pearson et al. (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: