+/- Conflicting evidence (from reliable sources) about the usefulness/efficacy of the intervention being evaluated. 0 Directly relevant evidence on effectiveness of an intervention the same as, or similar to, the initiative, of acceptable reliability, is lacking. -- Directly relevant evidence that the intervention being evaluated is not beneficial/useful or is ineffective - the evidence from a reliable source and is guidance based on RCTs, SRs or robust evaluations of appropriate outcomes or is a well conducted systematic review. - Directly relevant evidence that the intervention evaluated is not beneficial/useful or is ineffective -the evidence comes from a reliable source and is a robust/large RCT or robust evaluation of appropriate outcomes. Ql Well conducted studies using robust qualitative research methods which cast light on how/why intervention might be effective/ineffective or have important implications for interpretation of findings or other included studies. The grades’ for each included article were recorded in the Evidence ‘evidence Mapping Table for the initiative (Table 1). 2.1.6 A subjective judgment of the overall balance of evidence grades given to included articles was then made by one reviewer, to give a Evidence ‘Summary Grade’ for the Initiative: ++ is consistent, strong relevant evidence from reliable sources that the intervention/approach employed in the initiative has the potential to be effective. + There is some relevant evidence from reliable sources that the intervention/approach employed in the initiative has the potential to be effective. +/- Relevant evidence (from reliable sources) about the likely effectiveness of the intervention/approach employed in the initiative is conflicting. 0 Directly relevant evidence (from reliable sources) about the likely effectiveness of the intervention/approach employed in the initiative is lacking. - - There is consistent, strong relevant evidence from reliable sources that the intervention/approach employed in the initiative has the potential to be ineffective. - There is some relevant evidence from reliable sources that the intervention/approach employed in the initiative has the potential to be ineffective. Checks were made for consistency of application of these Evidence ‘Summary Grades’ through comparison and discussion amongst the reviewer team. 2.2) Assessment of initiative
+/- Conflicting evidence (from reliable sources) about the usefulness/efficacy of the intervention being evaluated. 0 Directly relevant evidence on effectiveness of an intervention the same as, or similar to, the initiative, of acceptable reliability, is lacking. -- Directly relevant evidence that the intervention being evaluated is not beneficial/useful or is ineffective - the evidence from a reliable source and is guidance based on RCTs, SRs or robust evaluations of appropriate outcomes or is a well conducted systematic review. - Directly relevant evidence that the intervention evaluated is not beneficial/useful or is ineffective -the evidence comes from a reliable source and is a robust/large RCT or robust evaluation of appropriate outcomes. Ql Well conducted studies using robust qualitative research methods which cast light on how/why intervention might be effective/ineffective or have important implications for interpretation of findings or other included studies. The ‘evidence grades’ for each included article were recorded in the Evidence Mapping Table for the initiative (Table 1). 2.1.6 A subjective judgment of the overall balance of evidence grades given to included articles was then made by one reviewer, to give a ‘Summary Evidence Grade’ for the Initiative: ++ is consistent, strong relevant evidence from reliable sources that the intervention/approach employed in the initiative has the potential to be effective. + There is some relevant evidence from reliable sources that the intervention/approach employed in the initiative has the potential to be effective. +/- Relevant evidence (from reliable sources) about the likely effectiveness of the intervention/approach employed in the initiative is conflicting. 0 Directly relevant evidence (from reliable sources) about the likely effectiveness of the intervention/approach employed in the initiative is lacking. - - There is consistent, strong relevant evidence from reliable sources that the intervention/approach employed in the initiative has the potential to be ineffective. - There is some relevant evidence from reliable sources that the intervention/approach employed in the initiative has the potential to be ineffective. Checks were made for consistency of application of these ‘Summary Evidence Grades’ through comparison and discussion amongst the reviewer team. 2.2) Assessment of initiative