{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015110631408526714, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0021586616297895305, 'mean_word_length': 5.242424242424242, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluating Dramatherapy. EBP and PBE: A Research Project

In March 2008 the British Association for Dramatherapists asked for tenders from members who were interested in undertaking a research project around evidence based practice. The outcome would need to be a database which members could easily access to find evidence for dramatherapy. Linda Winn and Ditty Dokter separately tendered for the project with two connected ideas. We found that the issue of Evidence Based Practice (EBP) and Practiced Based Evidence (PBE) underpinned the two ideas. Linda was interested in developing regional practice based evidence groups that would exchange good practice, but especially the use of different outcome measures in dramatherapy. Ditty was interested in conducting a systematic review of dramatherapy literature and establishing member groups of critical readers who could appraise the available literature and the quality of its evidence for a variety of client groups and settings. BADth asked for co-working, so that the two ideas could be incorporated into the one EBP/PBE database. We will evaluate the effectiveness of this research project in the closing section of this article and discuss how much the width of the brief was both an advantage and a disadvantage to the project. The commissioning agency; the professional association on behalf of the membership, needs an outcome that provides easy access and application to a wide membership. Systematic research endeavours a sufficient narrowness of focus to enable in-depth analysis and study. This article provides the journey of the project, showing how outcomes were achieved, but also outlining some of the difficulties encountered which influenced the quality of outcomes. The systematic review and the audit of outcome measures are separately discussed, before evaluating the outcomes.