Validity and validation in archetype analysis: practical assessment framework and guidelines

Archetype analysis is a promising approach in sustainability science to identify patterns and explain mechanisms shaping the sustainability of social-ecological systems. Although considerable efforts have been devoted to developing quality standards and methodological advances for archetype analysis, archetype validation remains a major challenge. Drawing on the insights from two international workshops on archetype analysis and on broader literature on validity, we propose a framework that identifies and describes six dimensions of validity: conceptual; construct; internal; external; empirical; and application validity. We first discuss the six dimensions in relation to different methodological approaches and purposes of archetype analysis. We then present an operational use of the framework for researchers to assess the validity of archetype analysis and to support sound archetype identification and policy-relevant applications. Finally, we apply our assessment to 18 published archetype analyses, which we use to describe the challenges and insights in validating the different dimensions and suggest ways to holistically improve the validity of identified archetypes. With this, we contribute to more rigorous archetype analyses, helping to develop the potential of the approach for guiding sustainability solutions.Peer Reviewe

A systematic review of structured compared with non-structured breastfeeding programmes to support the initiation and duration of exclusive and any breastfeeding in acute and primary health care settings.

Policies and guidelines have recommended that structured programmes to support breastfeeding should be introduced. The objective of this review was to consider the evidence of outcomes of structured compared with non-structured breastfeeding programmes in acute maternity care settings to support initiation and duration of exclusive breastfeeding. Quantitative and qualitative studies were considered. Primary outcomes of interest were initiation of breastfeeding and duration of exclusive breastfeeding. Studies that only considered community-based interventions were excluded. An extensive search of literature published in 1992-2010 was undertaken using identified key words and index terms. Methodological quality was assessed using checklists developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. Two independent reviewers conducted critical appraisal and data extraction; 26 articles were included. Because of clinical and methodological heterogeneity of study designs, it was not possible to combine studies or individual outcomes in meta-analyses. Most studies found a statistically significant improvement in breastfeeding initiation following introduction of a structured breastfeeding programme, although effect sizes varied. The impact on the duration of exclusive breastfeeding and duration of any breastfeeding to 6 months was also evident, although not all studies found statistically significant differences. Despite poor overall study quality, structured programmes compared with standard care positively influence the initiation and duration of exclusive breastfeeding and any breastfeeding. In health care settings with low breastfeeding initiation and duration rates, structured programmes may have a greater benefit. Few studies controlled for any potential confounding factors, and the impact of bias has to be considered