Similarities and differences in program registers: A case study

Researchers, clinicians, and other professionals are increasingly in need of cost-effective, evidence-based programs and practices. However, these individuals may lack the time and, for some, the required expertise to search for and identify such interventions. To address this concern, several online registers that list or categorize programs according to their empirical evidence of effectiveness have been established. Although these registers are designed to simplify the task of selecting evidence-based interventions, the use of distinct review processes and standards by each register creates discrepancies in final program classifications, which can pose a challenge for users. The present case study highlights three programs that have been evaluated by more than one register and have received similar or different classifications. Reasons for inconsistencies are discussed, and several recommendations for evaluating organizations and register users are provided to enhance the functionality and ease of use of online program registers.