Moderate Causal Evidence

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 161 - 170 of 183

A model for accelerating academic success of community college remedial English students: Is the Accelerated Learning Program (ALP) effective and affordable? (Jenkins et al. 2010)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Accelerated Learning Program (ALP) at the Community College of Baltimore County (CCBC) on success in college-level English courses (ENGL 101…
National Job Corps Study: Assessing program effects on earnings for students achieving key program milestones (Gritz & Johnson 2001)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to estimate the impact of Job Corps on the employment and earnings of participants who obtained a general education development (GED) certificate or vocational training…
Sustained gains: Year Up’s continued impacts on young adults’ earnings (Roder & Elliot 2014)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the effect of the Year Up program on employment, earnings, and education outcomes. Year Up is an intensive, yearlong program that provides training and…
Reentry experiences of confined juvenile offenders: Characteristics, service receipt and outcomes of juvenile male participants in the SVORI multi-site evaluation (Hawkins et al. 2010)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study examined the impact of the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) on employment, education, and recidivism among juvenile incarcerated males. The study used propensity…
The challenge of repeating success in a changing world: Final report on the Center for Employment Training replication sites (Miller et al. 2005)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
This report’s objective was to examine the effectiveness of the Center for Employment Training (CET) model. Under this model, local employers help design training programs and provide them in a work…
Randomized government safety inspections reduce worker injuries with no detectable job loss (Levine et al. 2012)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the effect of random OSHA inspections on firms’ injury-related outcomes and performance. To do this, the authors used a regression model to compare changes over…
Are OSHA Health Inspections Effective? A Longitudinal Study in the Manufacturing Sector (Gray & Jones 1991)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the effect of past Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) health inspections on the number of violations found in subsequent inspections. The…
Longitudinal patterns of compliance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration health and safety regulations in the manufacturing sector (Gray & Jones 1991)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the effect of past Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) inspections on the number of violations found in subsequent inspections. The study used…
An assessment of OSHA’s recent effects on injury rates (McCaffrey 1983)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the effect of OSHA inspections on injury rates in manufacturing and construction firms from 1976 to 1978. Although OSHA no longer operates as it did during this…
The Impact of OSHA Inspections on Manufacturing Injury Rates (Smith 1979)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the effect of OSHA inspections on injury rates in manufacturing firms in 1973 and 1974. Although OSHA no longer operates as it did during this period, this study…

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.