Randomized Control Trial (RCT)

Recently Added

CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.

Search
for studies on
this topic using
keywords
and filters

Displaying 81 - 90 of 527

Outcomes of on-line financial education for chronically ill rural women (Haynes et al., 2011)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of an online financial education module on financial knowledge. This profile focuses on the comparison between the less intensive intervention group…
Effects of an Individual Development Account program on retirement saving: Follow-up evidence from a randomized experiment (Grinstein-Weiss et al., 2015)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the American Dream Demonstration (ADD) on retirement savings contributions. The study was a randomized controlled trial that assigned…
Application of situational stimuli for examining the effectiveness of financial education: A behavioral finance perspective (Fan & Chatterjee, 2018)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the effect of situational stimuli in a financial education intervention on investment knowledge. The study design was a randomized controlled trial…
Using vignettes to improve understanding of Social Security and annuities (Samek et al., 2022)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of vignettes about financial planning on financial knowledge. The study was a randomized controlled trial and used data from the Understanding…
Evaluating a financial education curriculum as an intervention to improve financial behaviors and financial well-being of survivors of domestic violence: Results from a longitudinal randomized controlled study (Postmus et al., 2015)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Moving Ahead Through Financial Management program on financial knowledge, financial intentions, and financial behavior outcomes. The study…
Assessing the effectiveness of financial coaching: Evidence from the Boston Youth Credit Building Initiative (Modestino et al., 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Boston Youth Credit Building Initiative (BYCBI) on financial knowledge and behaviors. The study used a randomized controlled trial to…
First‐year impacts on savings and economic well‐being from the Assets for Independence program randomized evaluation (Mills et al., 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Assets for Independence (AFI) program on financial behaviors. The study used a randomized controlled trial to assign participants to the…
Can games build financial capability? Financial entertainment: A research overview (Maynard et al., 2012)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of a video game, Farm Blitz, on financial knowledge and financial self-confidence. The study used a randomized controlled trial to assign…
BOND implementation and evaluation: 2017 stage 2 interim process, participation, and impact report (Geyer et al., 2018)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Benefit Offset National Demonstration (BOND) on earnings and public benefits receipt. This profile focuses on the comparison between the group…
BOND implementation and evaluation: 2017 stage 2 interim process, participation, and impact report (Geyer et al., 2018)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Benefit Offset National Demonstration (BOND) on earnings and public benefits receipt. This profile focuses on the comparison between the group…

CLEAR Icon Key

Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.

High Causal Evidence

Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence

Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence

Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis

Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis

Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis

Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable

Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.