case study outcomes

How to write a case study — examples, templates, and tools

It’s a marketer’s job to communicate the effectiveness of a product or service to potential and current customers to convince them to buy and keep business moving. One of the best methods for doing this is to share success stories that are relatable to prospects and customers based on their pain points, experiences, and overall needs.

That’s where case studies come in. Case studies are an essential part of a content marketing plan. These in-depth stories of customer experiences are some of the most effective at demonstrating the value of a product or service. Yet many marketers don’t use them, whether because of their regimented formats or the process of customer involvement and approval.

A case study is a powerful tool for showcasing your hard work and the success your customer achieved. But writing a great case study can be difficult if you’ve never done it before or if it’s been a while. This guide will show you how to write an effective case study and provide real-world examples and templates that will keep readers engaged and support your business.

In this article, you’ll learn:

What is a case study?

How to write a case study, case study templates, case study examples, case study tools.

A case study is the detailed story of a customer’s experience with a product or service that demonstrates their success and often includes measurable outcomes. Case studies are used in a range of fields and for various reasons, from business to academic research. They’re especially impactful in marketing as brands work to convince and convert consumers with relatable, real-world stories of actual customer experiences.

The best case studies tell the story of a customer’s success, including the steps they took, the results they achieved, and the support they received from a brand along the way. To write a great case study, you need to:

• Celebrate the customer and make them — not a product or service — the star of the story.
• Craft the story with specific audiences or target segments in mind so that the story of one customer will be viewed as relatable and actionable for another customer.
• Write copy that is easy to read and engaging so that readers will gain the insights and messages intended.
• Follow a standardized format that includes all of the essentials a potential customer would find interesting and useful.
• Support all of the claims for success made in the story with data in the forms of hard numbers and customer statements.

Case studies are a type of review but more in depth, aiming to show — rather than just tell — the positive experiences that customers have with a brand. Notably, 89% of consumers read reviews before deciding to buy, and 79% view case study content as part of their purchasing process. When it comes to B2B sales, 52% of buyers rank case studies as an important part of their evaluation process.

Telling a brand story through the experience of a tried-and-true customer matters. The story is relatable to potential new customers as they imagine themselves in the shoes of the company or individual featured in the case study. Showcasing previous customers can help new ones see themselves engaging with your brand in the ways that are most meaningful to them.

Besides sharing the perspective of another customer, case studies stand out from other content marketing forms because they are based on evidence. Whether pulling from client testimonials or data-driven results, case studies tend to have more impact on new business because the story contains information that is both objective (data) and subjective (customer experience) — and the brand doesn’t sound too self-promotional.

Case studies are unique in that there’s a fairly standardized format for telling a customer’s story. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t room for creativity. It’s all about making sure that teams are clear on the goals for the case study — along with strategies for supporting content and channels — and understanding how the story fits within the framework of the company’s overall marketing goals.

Here are the basic steps to writing a good case study.

1. Identify your goal

Start by defining exactly who your case study will be designed to help. Case studies are about specific instances where a company works with a customer to achieve a goal. Identify which customers are likely to have these goals, as well as other needs the story should cover to appeal to them.

The answer is often found in one of the buyer personas that have been constructed as part of your larger marketing strategy. This can include anything from new leads generated by the marketing team to long-term customers that are being pressed for cross-sell opportunities. In all of these cases, demonstrating value through a relatable customer success story can be part of the solution to conversion.

2. Choose your client or subject

Who you highlight matters. Case studies tie brands together that might otherwise not cross paths. A writer will want to ensure that the highlighted customer aligns with their own company’s brand identity and offerings. Look for a customer with positive name recognition who has had great success with a product or service and is willing to be an advocate.

The client should also match up with the identified target audience. Whichever company or individual is selected should be a reflection of other potential customers who can see themselves in similar circumstances, having the same problems and possible solutions.

Some of the most compelling case studies feature customers who:

• Switch from one product or service to another while naming competitors that missed the mark.
• Experience measurable results that are relatable to others in a specific industry.
• Represent well-known brands and recognizable names that are likely to compel action.
• Advocate for a product or service as a champion and are well-versed in its advantages.

Whoever or whatever customer is selected, marketers must ensure they have the permission of the company involved before getting started. Some brands have strict review and approval procedures for any official marketing or promotional materials that include their name. Acquiring those approvals in advance will prevent any miscommunication or wasted effort if there is an issue with their legal or compliance teams.

3. Conduct research and compile data

Substantiating the claims made in a case study — either by the marketing team or customers themselves — adds validity to the story. To do this, include data and feedback from the client that defines what success looks like. This can be anything from demonstrating return on investment (ROI) to a specific metric the customer was striving to improve. Case studies should prove how an outcome was achieved and show tangible results that indicate to the customer that your solution is the right one.

This step could also include customer interviews. Make sure that the people being interviewed are key stakeholders in the purchase decision or deployment and use of the product or service that is being highlighted. Content writers should work off a set list of questions prepared in advance. It can be helpful to share these with the interviewees beforehand so they have time to consider and craft their responses. One of the best interview tactics to keep in mind is to ask questions where yes and no are not natural answers. This way, your subject will provide more open-ended responses that produce more meaningful content.

4. Choose the right format

There are a number of different ways to format a case study. Depending on what you hope to achieve, one style will be better than another. However, there are some common elements to include, such as:

• An engaging headline
• A subject and customer introduction
• The unique challenge or challenges the customer faced
• The solution the customer used to solve the problem
• The results achieved
• Data and statistics to back up claims of success
• A strong call to action (CTA) to engage with the vendor

It’s also important to note that while case studies are traditionally written as stories, they don’t have to be in a written format. Some companies choose to get more creative with their case studies and produce multimedia content, depending on their audience and objectives. Case study formats can include traditional print stories, interactive web or social content, data-heavy infographics, professionally shot videos, podcasts, and more.

5. Write your case study

We’ll go into more detail later about how exactly to write a case study, including templates and examples. Generally speaking, though, there are a few things to keep in mind when writing your case study.

• Be clear and concise. Readers want to get to the point of the story quickly and easily, and they’ll be looking to see themselves reflected in the story right from the start.
• Provide a big picture. Always make sure to explain who the client is, their goals, and how they achieved success in a short introduction to engage the reader.
• Construct a clear narrative. Stick to the story from the perspective of the customer and what they needed to solve instead of just listing product features or benefits.
• Leverage graphics. Incorporating infographics, charts, and sidebars can be a more engaging and eye-catching way to share key statistics and data in readable ways.
• Offer the right amount of detail. Most case studies are one or two pages with clear sections that a reader can skim to find the information most important to them.
• Include data to support claims. Show real results — both facts and figures and customer quotes — to demonstrate credibility and prove the solution works.

6. Promote your story

Marketers have a number of options for distribution of a freshly minted case study. Many brands choose to publish case studies on their website and post them on social media. This can help support SEO and organic content strategies while also boosting company credibility and trust as visitors see that other businesses have used the product or service.

Marketers are always looking for quality content they can use for lead generation. Consider offering a case study as gated content behind a form on a landing page or as an offer in an email message. One great way to do this is to summarize the content and tease the full story available for download after the user takes an action.

Sales teams can also leverage case studies, so be sure they are aware that the assets exist once they’re published. Especially when it comes to larger B2B sales, companies often ask for examples of similar customer challenges that have been solved.

Now that you’ve learned a bit about case studies and what they should include, you may be wondering how to start creating great customer story content. Here are a couple of templates you can use to structure your case study.

Template 1 — Challenge-solution-result format

• Start with an engaging title. This should be fewer than 70 characters long for SEO best practices. One of the best ways to approach the title is to include the customer’s name and a hint at the challenge they overcame in the end.
• Create an introduction. Lead with an explanation as to who the customer is, the need they had, and the opportunity they found with a specific product or solution. Writers can also suggest the success the customer experienced with the solution they chose.
• Present the challenge. This should be several paragraphs long and explain the problem the customer faced and the issues they were trying to solve. Details should tie into the company’s products and services naturally. This section needs to be the most relatable to the reader so they can picture themselves in a similar situation.
• Share the solution. Explain which product or service offered was the ideal fit for the customer and why. Feel free to delve into their experience setting up, purchasing, and onboarding the solution.
• Explain the results. Demonstrate the impact of the solution they chose by backing up their positive experience with data. Fill in with customer quotes and tangible, measurable results that show the effect of their choice.
• Ask for action. Include a CTA at the end of the case study that invites readers to reach out for more information, try a demo, or learn more — to nurture them further in the marketing pipeline. What you ask of the reader should tie directly into the goals that were established for the case study in the first place.

Template 2 — Data-driven format

• Start with an engaging title. Be sure to include a statistic or data point in the first 70 characters. Again, it’s best to include the customer’s name as part of the title.
• Create an overview. Share the customer’s background and a short version of the challenge they faced. Present the reason a particular product or service was chosen, and feel free to include quotes from the customer about their selection process.
• Present data point 1. Isolate the first metric that the customer used to define success and explain how the product or solution helped to achieve this goal. Provide data points and quotes to substantiate the claim that success was achieved.
• Present data point 2. Isolate the second metric that the customer used to define success and explain what the product or solution did to achieve this goal. Provide data points and quotes to substantiate the claim that success was achieved.
• Present data point 3. Isolate the final metric that the customer used to define success and explain what the product or solution did to achieve this goal. Provide data points and quotes to substantiate the claim that success was achieved.
• Summarize the results. Reiterate the fact that the customer was able to achieve success thanks to a specific product or service. Include quotes and statements that reflect customer satisfaction and suggest they plan to continue using the solution.
• Ask for action. Include a CTA at the end of the case study that asks readers to reach out for more information, try a demo, or learn more — to further nurture them in the marketing pipeline. Again, remember that this is where marketers can look to convert their content into action with the customer.

While templates are helpful, seeing a case study in action can also be a great way to learn. Here are some examples of how Adobe customers have experienced success.

Juniper Networks

One example is the Adobe and Juniper Networks case study , which puts the reader in the customer’s shoes. The beginning of the story quickly orients the reader so that they know exactly who the article is about and what they were trying to achieve. Solutions are outlined in a way that shows Adobe Experience Manager is the best choice and a natural fit for the customer. Along the way, quotes from the client are incorporated to help add validity to the statements. The results in the case study are conveyed with clear evidence of scale and volume using tangible data.

The story of Lenovo’s journey with Adobe is one that spans years of planning, implementation, and rollout. The Lenovo case study does a great job of consolidating all of this into a relatable journey that other enterprise organizations can see themselves taking, despite the project size. This case study also features descriptive headers and compelling visual elements that engage the reader and strengthen the content.

Tata Consulting

When it comes to using data to show customer results, this case study does an excellent job of conveying details and numbers in an easy-to-digest manner. Bullet points at the start break up the content while also helping the reader understand exactly what the case study will be about. Tata Consulting used Adobe to deliver elevated, engaging content experiences for a large telecommunications client of its own — an objective that’s relatable for a lot of companies.

Case studies are a vital tool for any marketing team as they enable you to demonstrate the value of your company’s products and services to others. They help marketers do their job and add credibility to a brand trying to promote its solutions by using the experiences and stories of real customers.

When you’re ready to get started with a case study:

• Think about a few goals you’d like to accomplish with your content.
• Make a list of successful clients that would be strong candidates for a case study.
• Reach out to the client to get their approval and conduct an interview.
• Gather the data to present an engaging and effective customer story.

Adobe can help

There are several Adobe products that can help you craft compelling case studies. Adobe Experience Platform helps you collect data and deliver great customer experiences across every channel. Once you’ve created your case studies, Experience Platform will help you deliver the right information to the right customer at the right time for maximum impact.

To learn more, watch the Adobe Experience Platform story .

Keep in mind that the best case studies are backed by data. That’s where Adobe Real-Time Customer Data Platform and Adobe Analytics come into play. With Real-Time CDP, you can gather the data you need to build a great case study and target specific customers to deliver the content to the right audience at the perfect moment.

Watch the Real-Time CDP overview video to learn more.

Finally, Adobe Analytics turns real-time data into real-time insights. It helps your business collect and synthesize data from multiple platforms to make more informed decisions and create the best case study possible.

Request a demo to learn more about Adobe Analytics.

https://business.adobe.com/blog/perspectives/b2b-ecommerce-10-case-studies-inspire-you

https://business.adobe.com/blog/basics/business-case

https://business.adobe.com/blog/basics/what-is-real-time-analytics

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2023 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

What Is a Case Study?

Weighing the pros and cons of this method of research

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Cara Lustik is a fact-checker and copywriter.

Verywell / Colleen Tighe

• Pros and Cons

What Types of Case Studies Are Out There?

Where do you find data for a case study, how do i write a psychology case study.

A case study is an in-depth study of one person, group, or event. In a case study, nearly every aspect of the subject's life and history is analyzed to seek patterns and causes of behavior. Case studies can be used in many different fields, including psychology, medicine, education, anthropology, political science, and social work.

The point of a case study is to learn as much as possible about an individual or group so that the information can be generalized to many others. Unfortunately, case studies tend to be highly subjective, and it is sometimes difficult to generalize results to a larger population.

While case studies focus on a single individual or group, they follow a format similar to other types of psychology writing. If you are writing a case study, we got you—here are some rules of APA format to reference.  

At a Glance

A case study, or an in-depth study of a person, group, or event, can be a useful research tool when used wisely. In many cases, case studies are best used in situations where it would be difficult or impossible for you to conduct an experiment. They are helpful for looking at unique situations and allow researchers to gather a lot of˜ information about a specific individual or group of people. However, it's important to be cautious of any bias we draw from them as they are highly subjective.

What Are the Benefits and Limitations of Case Studies?

A case study can have its strengths and weaknesses. Researchers must consider these pros and cons before deciding if this type of study is appropriate for their needs.

One of the greatest advantages of a case study is that it allows researchers to investigate things that are often difficult or impossible to replicate in a lab. Some other benefits of a case study:

• Allows researchers to capture information on the 'how,' 'what,' and 'why,' of something that's implemented
• Gives researchers the chance to collect information on why one strategy might be chosen over another
• Permits researchers to develop hypotheses that can be explored in experimental research

On the other hand, a case study can have some drawbacks:

• It cannot necessarily be generalized to the larger population
• Cannot demonstrate cause and effect
• It may not be scientifically rigorous
• It can lead to bias

Researchers may choose to perform a case study if they want to explore a unique or recently discovered phenomenon. Through their insights, researchers develop additional ideas and study questions that might be explored in future studies.

It's important to remember that the insights from case studies cannot be used to determine cause-and-effect relationships between variables. However, case studies may be used to develop hypotheses that can then be addressed in experimental research.

Case Study Examples

There have been a number of notable case studies in the history of psychology. Much of  Freud's work and theories were developed through individual case studies. Some great examples of case studies in psychology include:

• Anna O : Anna O. was a pseudonym of a woman named Bertha Pappenheim, a patient of a physician named Josef Breuer. While she was never a patient of Freud's, Freud and Breuer discussed her case extensively. The woman was experiencing symptoms of a condition that was then known as hysteria and found that talking about her problems helped relieve her symptoms. Her case played an important part in the development of talk therapy as an approach to mental health treatment.
• Phineas Gage : Phineas Gage was a railroad employee who experienced a terrible accident in which an explosion sent a metal rod through his skull, damaging important portions of his brain. Gage recovered from his accident but was left with serious changes in both personality and behavior.
• Genie : Genie was a young girl subjected to horrific abuse and isolation. The case study of Genie allowed researchers to study whether language learning was possible, even after missing critical periods for language development. Her case also served as an example of how scientific research may interfere with treatment and lead to further abuse of vulnerable individuals.

Such cases demonstrate how case research can be used to study things that researchers could not replicate in experimental settings. In Genie's case, her horrific abuse denied her the opportunity to learn a language at critical points in her development.

This is clearly not something researchers could ethically replicate, but conducting a case study on Genie allowed researchers to study phenomena that are otherwise impossible to reproduce.

There are a few different types of case studies that psychologists and other researchers might use:

• Collective case studies : These involve studying a group of individuals. Researchers might study a group of people in a certain setting or look at an entire community. For example, psychologists might explore how access to resources in a community has affected the collective mental well-being of those who live there.
• Descriptive case studies : These involve starting with a descriptive theory. The subjects are then observed, and the information gathered is compared to the pre-existing theory.
• Explanatory case studies : These   are often used to do causal investigations. In other words, researchers are interested in looking at factors that may have caused certain things to occur.
• Exploratory case studies : These are sometimes used as a prelude to further, more in-depth research. This allows researchers to gather more information before developing their research questions and hypotheses .
• Instrumental case studies : These occur when the individual or group allows researchers to understand more than what is initially obvious to observers.
• Intrinsic case studies : This type of case study is when the researcher has a personal interest in the case. Jean Piaget's observations of his own children are good examples of how an intrinsic case study can contribute to the development of a psychological theory.

The three main case study types often used are intrinsic, instrumental, and collective. Intrinsic case studies are useful for learning about unique cases. Instrumental case studies help look at an individual to learn more about a broader issue. A collective case study can be useful for looking at several cases simultaneously.

The type of case study that psychology researchers use depends on the unique characteristics of the situation and the case itself.

There are a number of different sources and methods that researchers can use to gather information about an individual or group. Six major sources that have been identified by researchers are:

• Archival records : Census records, survey records, and name lists are examples of archival records.
• Direct observation : This strategy involves observing the subject, often in a natural setting . While an individual observer is sometimes used, it is more common to utilize a group of observers.
• Documents : Letters, newspaper articles, administrative records, etc., are the types of documents often used as sources.
• Interviews : Interviews are one of the most important methods for gathering information in case studies. An interview can involve structured survey questions or more open-ended questions.
• Participant observation : When the researcher serves as a participant in events and observes the actions and outcomes, it is called participant observation.
• Physical artifacts : Tools, objects, instruments, and other artifacts are often observed during a direct observation of the subject.

If you have been directed to write a case study for a psychology course, be sure to check with your instructor for any specific guidelines you need to follow. If you are writing your case study for a professional publication, check with the publisher for their specific guidelines for submitting a case study.

Here is a general outline of what should be included in a case study.

Section 1: A Case History

This section will have the following structure and content:

Background information : The first section of your paper will present your client's background. Include factors such as age, gender, work, health status, family mental health history, family and social relationships, drug and alcohol history, life difficulties, goals, and coping skills and weaknesses.

Description of the presenting problem : In the next section of your case study, you will describe the problem or symptoms that the client presented with.

Describe any physical, emotional, or sensory symptoms reported by the client. Thoughts, feelings, and perceptions related to the symptoms should also be noted. Any screening or diagnostic assessments that are used should also be described in detail and all scores reported.

Your diagnosis : Provide your diagnosis and give the appropriate Diagnostic and Statistical Manual code. Explain how you reached your diagnosis, how the client's symptoms fit the diagnostic criteria for the disorder(s), or any possible difficulties in reaching a diagnosis.

Section 2: Treatment Plan

This portion of the paper will address the chosen treatment for the condition. This might also include the theoretical basis for the chosen treatment or any other evidence that might exist to support why this approach was chosen.

• Cognitive behavioral approach : Explain how a cognitive behavioral therapist would approach treatment. Offer background information on cognitive behavioral therapy and describe the treatment sessions, client response, and outcome of this type of treatment. Make note of any difficulties or successes encountered by your client during treatment.
• Humanistic approach : Describe a humanistic approach that could be used to treat your client, such as client-centered therapy . Provide information on the type of treatment you chose, the client's reaction to the treatment, and the end result of this approach. Explain why the treatment was successful or unsuccessful.
• Psychoanalytic approach : Describe how a psychoanalytic therapist would view the client's problem. Provide some background on the psychoanalytic approach and cite relevant references. Explain how psychoanalytic therapy would be used to treat the client, how the client would respond to therapy, and the effectiveness of this treatment approach.
• Pharmacological approach : If treatment primarily involves the use of medications, explain which medications were used and why. Provide background on the effectiveness of these medications and how monotherapy may compare with an approach that combines medications with therapy or other treatments.

This section of a case study should also include information about the treatment goals, process, and outcomes.

When you are writing a case study, you should also include a section where you discuss the case study itself, including the strengths and limitiations of the study. You should note how the findings of your case study might support previous research. 

In your discussion section, you should also describe some of the implications of your case study. What ideas or findings might require further exploration? How might researchers go about exploring some of these questions in additional studies?

Need More Tips?

Here are a few additional pointers to keep in mind when formatting your case study:

• Never refer to the subject of your case study as "the client." Instead, use their name or a pseudonym.
• Read examples of case studies to gain an idea about the style and format.
• Remember to use APA format when citing references .

Crowe S, Cresswell K, Robertson A, Huby G, Avery A, Sheikh A. The case study approach .  BMC Med Res Methodol . 2011;11:100.

Crowe S, Cresswell K, Robertson A, Huby G, Avery A, Sheikh A. The case study approach . BMC Med Res Methodol . 2011 Jun 27;11:100. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Gagnon, Yves-Chantal.  The Case Study as Research Method: A Practical Handbook . Canada, Chicago Review Press Incorporated DBA Independent Pub Group, 2010.

Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods . United States, SAGE Publications, 2017.

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

Definition and Introduction

Case analysis is a problem-based teaching and learning method that involves critically analyzing complex scenarios within an organizational setting for the purpose of placing the student in a “real world” situation and applying reflection and critical thinking skills to contemplate appropriate solutions, decisions, or recommended courses of action. It is considered a more effective teaching technique than in-class role playing or simulation activities. The analytical process is often guided by questions provided by the instructor that ask students to contemplate relationships between the facts and critical incidents described in the case.

Cases generally include both descriptive and statistical elements and rely on students applying abductive reasoning to develop and argue for preferred or best outcomes [i.e., case scenarios rarely have a single correct or perfect answer based on the evidence provided]. Rather than emphasizing theories or concepts, case analysis assignments emphasize building a bridge of relevancy between abstract thinking and practical application and, by so doing, teaches the value of both within a specific area of professional practice.

Given this, the purpose of a case analysis paper is to present a structured and logically organized format for analyzing the case situation. It can be assigned to students individually or as a small group assignment and it may include an in-class presentation component. Case analysis is predominately taught in economics and business-related courses, but it is also a method of teaching and learning found in other applied social sciences disciplines, such as, social work, public relations, education, journalism, and public administration.

Ellet, William. The Case Study Handbook: A Student's Guide . Revised Edition. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing, 2018; Christoph Rasche and Achim Seisreiner. Guidelines for Business Case Analysis . University of Potsdam; Writing a Case Analysis . Writing Center, Baruch College; Volpe, Guglielmo. "Case Teaching in Economics: History, Practice and Evidence." Cogent Economics and Finance 3 (December 2015). doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2015.1120977.

How to Approach Writing a Case Analysis Paper

The organization and structure of a case analysis paper can vary depending on the organizational setting, the situation, and how your professor wants you to approach the assignment. Nevertheless, preparing to write a case analysis paper involves several important steps. As Hawes notes, a case analysis assignment “...is useful in developing the ability to get to the heart of a problem, analyze it thoroughly, and to indicate the appropriate solution as well as how it should be implemented” [p.48]. This statement encapsulates how you should approach preparing to write a case analysis paper.

Before you begin to write your paper, consider the following analytical procedures:

• Review the case to get an overview of the situation . A case can be only a few pages in length, however, it is most often very lengthy and contains a significant amount of detailed background information and statistics, with multilayered descriptions of the scenario, the roles and behaviors of various stakeholder groups, and situational events. Therefore, a quick reading of the case will help you gain an overall sense of the situation and illuminate the types of issues and problems that you will need to address in your paper. If your professor has provided questions intended to help frame your analysis, use them to guide your initial reading of the case.
• Read the case thoroughly . After gaining a general overview of the case, carefully read the content again with the purpose of understanding key circumstances, events, and behaviors among stakeholder groups. Look for information or data that appears contradictory, extraneous, or misleading. At this point, you should be taking notes as you read because this will help you develop a general outline of your paper. The aim is to obtain a complete understanding of the situation so that you can begin contemplating tentative answers to any questions your professor has provided or, if they have not provided, developing answers to your own questions about the case scenario and its connection to the course readings,lectures, and class discussions.
• Determine key stakeholder groups, issues, and events and the relationships they all have to each other . As you analyze the content, pay particular attention to identifying individuals, groups, or organizations described in the case and identify evidence of any problems or issues of concern that impact the situation in a negative way. Other things to look for include identifying any assumptions being made by or about each stakeholder, potential biased explanations or actions, explicit demands or ultimatums , and the underlying concerns that motivate these behaviors among stakeholders. The goal at this stage is to develop a comprehensive understanding of the situational and behavioral dynamics of the case and the explicit and implicit consequences of each of these actions.
• Identify the core problems . The next step in most case analysis assignments is to discern what the core [i.e., most damaging, detrimental, injurious] problems are within the organizational setting and to determine their implications. The purpose at this stage of preparing to write your analysis paper is to distinguish between the symptoms of core problems and the core problems themselves and to decide which of these must be addressed immediately and which problems do not appear critical but may escalate over time. Identify evidence from the case to support your decisions by determining what information or data is essential to addressing the core problems and what information is not relevant or is misleading.
• Explore alternative solutions . As noted, case analysis scenarios rarely have only one correct answer. Therefore, it is important to keep in mind that the process of analyzing the case and diagnosing core problems, while based on evidence, is a subjective process open to various avenues of interpretation. This means that you must consider alternative solutions or courses of action by critically examining strengths and weaknesses, risk factors, and the differences between short and long-term solutions. For each possible solution or course of action, consider the consequences they may have related to their implementation and how these recommendations might lead to new problems. Also, consider thinking about your recommended solutions or courses of action in relation to issues of fairness, equity, and inclusion.
• Decide on a final set of recommendations . The last stage in preparing to write a case analysis paper is to assert an opinion or viewpoint about the recommendations needed to help resolve the core problems as you see them and to make a persuasive argument for supporting this point of view. Prepare a clear rationale for your recommendations based on examining each element of your analysis. Anticipate possible obstacles that could derail their implementation. Consider any counter-arguments that could be made concerning the validity of your recommended actions. Finally, describe a set of criteria and measurable indicators that could be applied to evaluating the effectiveness of your implementation plan.

Use these steps as the framework for writing your paper. Remember that the more detailed you are in taking notes as you critically examine each element of the case, the more information you will have to draw from when you begin to write. This will save you time.

NOTE : If the process of preparing to write a case analysis paper is assigned as a student group project, consider having each member of the group analyze a specific element of the case, including drafting answers to the corresponding questions used by your professor to frame the analysis. This will help make the analytical process more efficient and ensure that the distribution of work is equitable. This can also facilitate who is responsible for drafting each part of the final case analysis paper and, if applicable, the in-class presentation.

Framework for Case Analysis . College of Management. University of Massachusetts; Hawes, Jon M. "Teaching is Not Telling: The Case Method as a Form of Interactive Learning." Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education 5 (Winter 2004): 47-54; Rasche, Christoph and Achim Seisreiner. Guidelines for Business Case Analysis . University of Potsdam; Writing a Case Study Analysis . University of Arizona Global Campus Writing Center; Van Ness, Raymond K. A Guide to Case Analysis . School of Business. State University of New York, Albany; Writing a Case Analysis . Business School, University of New South Wales.

Structure and Writing Style

A case analysis paper should be detailed, concise, persuasive, clearly written, and professional in tone and in the use of language . As with other forms of college-level academic writing, declarative statements that convey information, provide a fact, or offer an explanation or any recommended courses of action should be based on evidence. If allowed by your professor, any external sources used to support your analysis, such as course readings, should be properly cited under a list of references. The organization and structure of case analysis papers can vary depending on your professor’s preferred format, but its structure generally follows the steps used for analyzing the case.

Introduction

The introduction should provide a succinct but thorough descriptive overview of the main facts, issues, and core problems of the case . The introduction should also include a brief summary of the most relevant details about the situation and organizational setting. This includes defining the theoretical framework or conceptual model on which any questions were used to frame your analysis.

Following the rules of most college-level research papers, the introduction should then inform the reader how the paper will be organized. This includes describing the major sections of the paper and the order in which they will be presented. Unless you are told to do so by your professor, you do not need to preview your final recommendations in the introduction. U nlike most college-level research papers , the introduction does not include a statement about the significance of your findings because a case analysis assignment does not involve contributing new knowledge about a research problem.

Background Analysis

Background analysis can vary depending on any guiding questions provided by your professor and the underlying concept or theory that the case is based upon. In general, however, this section of your paper should focus on:

• Providing an overarching analysis of problems identified from the case scenario, including identifying events that stakeholders find challenging or troublesome,
• Identifying assumptions made by each stakeholder and any apparent biases they may exhibit,
• Describing any demands or claims made by or forced upon key stakeholders, and
• Highlighting any issues of concern or complaints expressed by stakeholders in response to those demands or claims.

These aspects of the case are often in the form of behavioral responses expressed by individuals or groups within the organizational setting. However, note that problems in a case situation can also be reflected in data [or the lack thereof] and in the decision-making, operational, cultural, or institutional structure of the organization. Additionally, demands or claims can be either internal and external to the organization [e.g., a case analysis involving a president considering arms sales to Saudi Arabia could include managing internal demands from White House advisors as well as demands from members of Congress].

Throughout this section, present all relevant evidence from the case that supports your analysis. Do not simply claim there is a problem, an assumption, a demand, or a concern; tell the reader what part of the case informed how you identified these background elements.

Identification of Problems

In most case analysis assignments, there are problems, and then there are problems . Each problem can reflect a multitude of underlying symptoms that are detrimental to the interests of the organization. The purpose of identifying problems is to teach students how to differentiate between problems that vary in severity, impact, and relative importance. Given this, problems can be described in three general forms: those that must be addressed immediately, those that should be addressed but the impact is not severe, and those that do not require immediate attention and can be set aside for the time being.

All of the problems you identify from the case should be identified in this section of your paper, with a description based on evidence explaining the problem variances. If the assignment asks you to conduct research to further support your assessment of the problems, include this in your explanation. Remember to cite those sources in a list of references. Use specific evidence from the case and apply appropriate concepts, theories, and models discussed in class or in relevant course readings to highlight and explain the key problems [or problem] that you believe must be solved immediately and describe the underlying symptoms and why they are so critical.

Alternative Solutions

This section is where you provide specific, realistic, and evidence-based solutions to the problems you have identified and make recommendations about how to alleviate the underlying symptomatic conditions impacting the organizational setting. For each solution, you must explain why it was chosen and provide clear evidence to support your reasoning. This can include, for example, course readings and class discussions as well as research resources, such as, books, journal articles, research reports, or government documents. In some cases, your professor may encourage you to include personal, anecdotal experiences as evidence to support why you chose a particular solution or set of solutions. Using anecdotal evidence helps promote reflective thinking about the process of determining what qualifies as a core problem and relevant solution .

Throughout this part of the paper, keep in mind the entire array of problems that must be addressed and describe in detail the solutions that might be implemented to resolve these problems.

Recommended Courses of Action

In some case analysis assignments, your professor may ask you to combine the alternative solutions section with your recommended courses of action. However, it is important to know the difference between the two. A solution refers to the answer to a problem. A course of action refers to a procedure or deliberate sequence of activities adopted to proactively confront a situation, often in the context of accomplishing a goal. In this context, proposed courses of action are based on your analysis of alternative solutions. Your description and justification for pursuing each course of action should represent the overall plan for implementing your recommendations.

For each course of action, you need to explain the rationale for your recommendation in a way that confronts challenges, explains risks, and anticipates any counter-arguments from stakeholders. Do this by considering the strengths and weaknesses of each course of action framed in relation to how the action is expected to resolve the core problems presented, the possible ways the action may affect remaining problems, and how the recommended action will be perceived by each stakeholder.

In addition, you should describe the criteria needed to measure how well the implementation of these actions is working and explain which individuals or groups are responsible for ensuring your recommendations are successful. In addition, always consider the law of unintended consequences. Outline difficulties that may arise in implementing each course of action and describe how implementing the proposed courses of action [either individually or collectively] may lead to new problems [both large and small].

Throughout this section, you must consider the costs and benefits of recommending your courses of action in relation to uncertainties or missing information and the negative consequences of success.

The conclusion should be brief and introspective. Unlike a research paper, the conclusion in a case analysis paper does not include a summary of key findings and their significance, a statement about how the study contributed to existing knowledge, or indicate opportunities for future research.

Begin by synthesizing the core problems presented in the case and the relevance of your recommended solutions. This can include an explanation of what you have learned about the case in the context of your answers to the questions provided by your professor. The conclusion is also where you link what you learned from analyzing the case with the course readings or class discussions. This can further demonstrate your understanding of the relationships between the practical case situation and the theoretical and abstract content of assigned readings and other course content.

Problems to Avoid

The literature on case analysis assignments often includes examples of difficulties students have with applying methods of critical analysis and effectively reporting the results of their assessment of the situation. A common reason cited by scholars is that the application of this type of teaching and learning method is limited to applied fields of social and behavioral sciences and, as a result, writing a case analysis paper can be unfamiliar to most students entering college.

After you have drafted your paper, proofread the narrative flow and revise any of these common errors:

• Unnecessary detail in the background section . The background section should highlight the essential elements of the case based on your analysis. Focus on summarizing the facts and highlighting the key factors that become relevant in the other sections of the paper by eliminating any unnecessary information.
• Analysis relies too much on opinion . Your analysis is interpretive, but the narrative must be connected clearly to evidence from the case and any models and theories discussed in class or in course readings. Any positions or arguments you make should be supported by evidence.
• Analysis does not focus on the most important elements of the case . Your paper should provide a thorough overview of the case. However, the analysis should focus on providing evidence about what you identify are the key events, stakeholders, issues, and problems. Emphasize what you identify as the most critical aspects of the case to be developed throughout your analysis. Be thorough but succinct.
• Writing is too descriptive . A paper with too much descriptive information detracts from your analysis of the complexities of the case situation. Questions about what happened, where, when, and by whom should only be included as essential information leading to your examination of questions related to why, how, and for what purpose.
• Inadequate definition of a core problem and associated symptoms . A common error found in case analysis papers is recommending a solution or course of action without adequately defining or demonstrating that you understand the problem. Make sure you have clearly described the problem and its impact and scope within the organizational setting. Ensure that you have adequately described the root causes w hen describing the symptoms of the problem.
• Recommendations lack specificity . Identify any use of vague statements and indeterminate terminology, such as, “A particular experience” or “a large increase to the budget.” These statements cannot be measured and, as a result, there is no way to evaluate their successful implementation. Provide specific data and use direct language in describing recommended actions.
• Unrealistic, exaggerated, or unattainable recommendations . Review your recommendations to ensure that they are based on the situational facts of the case. Your recommended solutions and courses of action must be based on realistic assumptions and fit within the constraints of the situation. Also note that the case scenario has already happened, therefore, any speculation or arguments about what could have occurred if the circumstances were different should be revised or eliminated.

Bee, Lian Song et al. "Business Students' Perspectives on Case Method Coaching for Problem-Based Learning: Impacts on Student Engagement and Learning Performance in Higher Education." Education & Training 64 (2022): 416-432; The Case Analysis . Fred Meijer Center for Writing and Michigan Authors. Grand Valley State University; Georgallis, Panikos and Kayleigh Bruijn. "Sustainability Teaching using Case-Based Debates." Journal of International Education in Business 15 (2022): 147-163; Hawes, Jon M. "Teaching is Not Telling: The Case Method as a Form of Interactive Learning." Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education 5 (Winter 2004): 47-54; Georgallis, Panikos, and Kayleigh Bruijn. "Sustainability Teaching Using Case-based Debates." Journal of International Education in Business 15 (2022): 147-163; .Dean,  Kathy Lund and Charles J. Fornaciari. "How to Create and Use Experiential Case-Based Exercises in a Management Classroom." Journal of Management Education 26 (October 2002): 586-603; Klebba, Joanne M. and Janet G. Hamilton. "Structured Case Analysis: Developing Critical Thinking Skills in a Marketing Case Course." Journal of Marketing Education 29 (August 2007): 132-137, 139; Klein, Norman. "The Case Discussion Method Revisited: Some Questions about Student Skills." Exchange: The Organizational Behavior Teaching Journal 6 (November 1981): 30-32; Mukherjee, Arup. "Effective Use of In-Class Mini Case Analysis for Discovery Learning in an Undergraduate MIS Course." The Journal of Computer Information Systems 40 (Spring 2000): 15-23; Pessoa, Silviaet al. "Scaffolding the Case Analysis in an Organizational Behavior Course: Making Analytical Language Explicit." Journal of Management Education 46 (2022): 226-251: Ramsey, V. J. and L. D. Dodge. "Case Analysis: A Structured Approach." Exchange: The Organizational Behavior Teaching Journal 6 (November 1981): 27-29; Schweitzer, Karen. "How to Write and Format a Business Case Study." ThoughtCo. https://www.thoughtco.com/how-to-write-and-format-a-business-case-study-466324 (accessed December 5, 2022); Reddy, C. D. "Teaching Research Methodology: Everything's a Case." Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods 18 (December 2020): 178-188; Volpe, Guglielmo. "Case Teaching in Economics: History, Practice and Evidence." Cogent Economics and Finance 3 (December 2015). doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2015.1120977.

Writing Tip

Ca se Study and Case Analysis Are Not the Same!

Confusion often exists between what it means to write a paper that uses a case study research design and writing a paper that analyzes a case; they are two different types of approaches to learning in the social and behavioral sciences. Professors as well as educational researchers contribute to this confusion because they often use the term "case study" when describing the subject of analysis for a case analysis paper. But you are not studying a case for the purpose of generating a comprehensive, multi-faceted understanding of a research problem. R ather, you are critically analyzing a specific scenario to argue logically for recommended solutions and courses of action that lead to optimal outcomes applicable to professional practice.

To avoid any confusion, here are twelve characteristics that delineate the differences between writing a paper using the case study research method and writing a case analysis paper:

• Case study is a method of in-depth research and rigorous inquiry ; case analysis is a reliable method of teaching and learning . A case study is a modality of research that investigates a phenomenon for the purpose of creating new knowledge, solving a problem, or testing a hypothesis using empirical evidence derived from the case being studied. Often, the results are used to generalize about a larger population or within a wider context. The writing adheres to the traditional standards of a scholarly research study. A case analysis is a pedagogical tool used to teach students how to reflect and think critically about a practical, real-life problem in an organizational setting.
• The researcher is responsible for identifying the case to study; a case analysis is assigned by your professor . As the researcher, you choose the case study to investigate in support of obtaining new knowledge and understanding about the research problem. The case in a case analysis assignment is almost always provided, and sometimes written, by your professor and either given to every student in class to analyze individually or to a small group of students, or students select a case to analyze from a predetermined list.
• A case study is indeterminate and boundless; a case analysis is predetermined and confined . A case study can be almost anything [see item 9 below] as long as it relates directly to examining the research problem. This relationship is the only limit to what a researcher can choose as the subject of their case study. The content of a case analysis is determined by your professor and its parameters are well-defined and limited to elucidating insights of practical value applied to practice.
• Case study is fact-based and describes actual events or situations; case analysis can be entirely fictional or adapted from an actual situation . The entire content of a case study must be grounded in reality to be a valid subject of investigation in an empirical research study. A case analysis only needs to set the stage for critically examining a situation in practice and, therefore, can be entirely fictional or adapted, all or in-part, from an actual situation.
• Research using a case study method must adhere to principles of intellectual honesty and academic integrity; a case analysis scenario can include misleading or false information . A case study paper must report research objectively and factually to ensure that any findings are understood to be logically correct and trustworthy. A case analysis scenario may include misleading or false information intended to deliberately distract from the central issues of the case. The purpose is to teach students how to sort through conflicting or useless information in order to come up with the preferred solution. Any use of misleading or false information in academic research is considered unethical.
• Case study is linked to a research problem; case analysis is linked to a practical situation or scenario . In the social sciences, the subject of an investigation is most often framed as a problem that must be researched in order to generate new knowledge leading to a solution. Case analysis narratives are grounded in real life scenarios for the purpose of examining the realities of decision-making behavior and processes within organizational settings. A case analysis assignments include a problem or set of problems to be analyzed. However, the goal is centered around the act of identifying and evaluating courses of action leading to best possible outcomes.
• The purpose of a case study is to create new knowledge through research; the purpose of a case analysis is to teach new understanding . Case studies are a choice of methodological design intended to create new knowledge about resolving a research problem. A case analysis is a mode of teaching and learning intended to create new understanding and an awareness of uncertainty applied to practice through acts of critical thinking and reflection.
• A case study seeks to identify the best possible solution to a research problem; case analysis can have an indeterminate set of solutions or outcomes . Your role in studying a case is to discover the most logical, evidence-based ways to address a research problem. A case analysis assignment rarely has a single correct answer because one of the goals is to force students to confront the real life dynamics of uncertainly, ambiguity, and missing or conflicting information within professional practice. Under these conditions, a perfect outcome or solution almost never exists.
• Case study is unbounded and relies on gathering external information; case analysis is a self-contained subject of analysis . The scope of a case study chosen as a method of research is bounded. However, the researcher is free to gather whatever information and data is necessary to investigate its relevance to understanding the research problem. For a case analysis assignment, your professor will often ask you to examine solutions or recommended courses of action based solely on facts and information from the case.
• Case study can be a person, place, object, issue, event, condition, or phenomenon; a case analysis is a carefully constructed synopsis of events, situations, and behaviors . The research problem dictates the type of case being studied and, therefore, the design can encompass almost anything tangible as long as it fulfills the objective of generating new knowledge and understanding. A case analysis is in the form of a narrative containing descriptions of facts, situations, processes, rules, and behaviors within a particular setting and under a specific set of circumstances.
• Case study can represent an open-ended subject of inquiry; a case analysis is a narrative about something that has happened in the past . A case study is not restricted by time and can encompass an event or issue with no temporal limit or end. For example, the current war in Ukraine can be used as a case study of how medical personnel help civilians during a large military conflict, even though circumstances around this event are still evolving. A case analysis can be used to elicit critical thinking about current or future situations in practice, but the case itself is a narrative about something finite and that has taken place in the past.
• Multiple case studies can be used in a research study; case analysis involves examining a single scenario . Case study research can use two or more cases to examine a problem, often for the purpose of conducting a comparative investigation intended to discover hidden relationships, document emerging trends, or determine variations among different examples. A case analysis assignment typically describes a stand-alone, self-contained situation and any comparisons among cases are conducted during in-class discussions and/or student presentations.

The Case Analysis . Fred Meijer Center for Writing and Michigan Authors. Grand Valley State University; Mills, Albert J. , Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010; Ramsey, V. J. and L. D. Dodge. "Case Analysis: A Structured Approach." Exchange: The Organizational Behavior Teaching Journal 6 (November 1981): 27-29; Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods . 6th edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2017; Crowe, Sarah et al. “The Case Study Approach.” BMC Medical Research Methodology 11 (2011):  doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-11-100; Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods . 4th edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing; 1994.

• << Previous: Reviewing Collected Works
• Next: Writing a Case Study >>
• Last Updated: Mar 6, 2024 1:00 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

We use essential cookies to make Venngage work. By clicking “Accept All Cookies”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts.

Manage Cookies

Cookies and similar technologies collect certain information about how you’re using our website. Some of them are essential, and without them you wouldn’t be able to use Venngage. But others are optional, and you get to choose whether we use them or not.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

These cookies are always on, as they’re essential for making Venngage work, and making it safe. Without these cookies, services you’ve asked for can’t be provided.

Show cookie providers

• Google Login

Functionality Cookies

These cookies help us provide enhanced functionality and personalisation, and remember your settings. They may be set by us or by third party providers.

Performance Cookies

These cookies help us analyze how many people are using Venngage, where they come from and how they're using it. If you opt out of these cookies, we can’t get feedback to make Venngage better for you and all our users.

• Google Analytics

Targeting Cookies

These cookies are set by our advertising partners to track your activity and show you relevant Venngage ads on other sites as you browse the internet.

• Google Tag Manager
• Infographics
• Daily Infographics
• Template Lists
• Graphic Design
• Graphs and Charts
• Data Visualization
• Human Resources
• Beginner Guides

Blog Business

How to Present a Case Study like a Pro (With Examples)

By Danesh Ramuthi , Sep 07, 2023

Okay, let’s get real: case studies can be kinda snooze-worthy. But guess what? They don’t have to be!

In this article, I will cover every element that transforms a mere report into a compelling case study, from selecting the right metrics to using persuasive narrative techniques.

And if you’re feeling a little lost, don’t worry! There are cool tools like Venngage’s Case Study Creator to help you whip up something awesome, even if you’re short on time. Plus, the pre-designed case study templates are like instant polish because let’s be honest, everyone loves a shortcut.

Click to jump ahead: 

What is a case study presentation?

What is the purpose of presenting a case study, how to structure a case study presentation, how long should a case study presentation be, 5 case study presentation examples with templates, 6 tips for delivering an effective case study presentation, 5 common mistakes to avoid in a case study presentation, how to present a case study faqs.

A case study presentation involves a comprehensive examination of a specific subject, which could range from an individual, group, location, event, organization or phenomenon.

They’re like puzzles you get to solve with the audience, all while making you think outside the box.

Unlike a basic report or whitepaper, the purpose of a case study presentation is to stimulate critical thinking among the viewers. 

The primary objective of a case study is to provide an extensive and profound comprehension of the chosen topic. You don’t just throw numbers at your audience. You use examples and real-life cases to make you think and see things from different angles.

The primary purpose of presenting a case study is to offer a comprehensive, evidence-based argument that informs, persuades and engages your audience.

Here’s the juicy part: presenting that case study can be your secret weapon. Whether you’re pitching a groundbreaking idea to a room full of suits or trying to impress your professor with your A-game, a well-crafted case study can be the magic dust that sprinkles brilliance over your words.

Think of it like digging into a puzzle you can’t quite crack . A case study lets you explore every piece, turn it over and see how it fits together. This close-up look helps you understand the whole picture, not just a blurry snapshot.

It’s also your chance to showcase how you analyze things, step by step, until you reach a conclusion. It’s all about being open and honest about how you got there.

Besides, presenting a case study gives you an opportunity to connect data and real-world scenarios in a compelling narrative. It helps to make your argument more relatable and accessible, increasing its impact on your audience.

One of the contexts where case studies can be very helpful is during the job interview. In some job interviews, you as candidates may be asked to present a case study as part of the selection process.

Having a case study presentation prepared allows the candidate to demonstrate their ability to understand complex issues, formulate strategies and communicate their ideas effectively.

The way you present a case study can make all the difference in how it’s received. A well-structured presentation not only holds the attention of your audience but also ensures that your key points are communicated clearly and effectively.

In this section, let’s go through the key steps that’ll help you structure your case study presentation for maximum impact.

Let’s get into it. 

Open with an introductory overview 

Start by introducing the subject of your case study and its relevance. Explain why this case study is important and who would benefit from the insights gained. This is your opportunity to grab your audience’s attention.

Explain the problem in question

Dive into the problem or challenge that the case study focuses on. Provide enough background information for the audience to understand the issue. If possible, quantify the problem using data or metrics to show the magnitude or severity.

Detail the solutions to solve the problem

After outlining the problem, describe the steps taken to find a solution. This could include the methodology, any experiments or tests performed and the options that were considered. Make sure to elaborate on why the final solution was chosen over the others.

Key stakeholders Involved

Talk about the individuals, groups or organizations that were directly impacted by or involved in the problem and its solution. 

Stakeholders may experience a range of outcomes—some may benefit, while others could face setbacks.

For example, in a business transformation case study, employees could face job relocations or changes in work culture, while shareholders might be looking at potential gains or losses.

Discuss the key results & outcomes

Discuss the results of implementing the solution. Use data and metrics to back up your statements. Did the solution meet its objectives? What impact did it have on the stakeholders? Be honest about any setbacks or areas for improvement as well.

Include visuals to support your analysis

Visual aids can be incredibly effective in helping your audience grasp complex issues. Utilize charts, graphs, images or video clips to supplement your points. Make sure to explain each visual and how it contributes to your overall argument.

Pie charts illustrate the proportion of different components within a whole, useful for visualizing market share, budget allocation or user demographics.

This is particularly useful especially if you’re displaying survey results in your case study presentation.

Stacked charts on the other hand are perfect for visualizing composition and trends. This is great for analyzing things like customer demographics, product breakdowns or budget allocation in your case study.

Consider this example of a stacked bar chart template. It provides a straightforward summary of the top-selling cake flavors across various locations, offering a quick and comprehensive view of the data.

Not the chart you’re looking for? Browse Venngage’s gallery of chart templates to find the perfect one that’ll captivate your audience and level up your data storytelling.

Recommendations and next steps

Wrap up by providing recommendations based on the case study findings. Outline the next steps that stakeholders should take to either expand on the success of the project or address any remaining challenges.

Acknowledgments and references

Thank the people who contributed to the case study and helped in the problem-solving process. Cite any external resources, reports or data sets that contributed to your analysis.

Feedback & Q&A session

Open the floor for questions and feedback from your audience. This allows for further discussion and can provide additional insights that may not have been considered previously.

Closing remarks

Conclude the presentation by summarizing the key points and emphasizing the takeaways. Thank your audience for their time and participation and express your willingness to engage in further discussions or collaborations on the subject.

Well, the length of a case study presentation can vary depending on the complexity of the topic and the needs of your audience. However, a typical business or academic presentation often lasts between 15 to 30 minutes. 

This time frame usually allows for a thorough explanation of the case while maintaining audience engagement. However, always consider leaving a few minutes at the end for a Q&A session to address any questions or clarify points made during the presentation.

When it comes to presenting a compelling case study, having a well-structured template can be a game-changer. 

It helps you organize your thoughts, data and findings in a coherent and visually pleasing manner. 

Not all case studies are created equal and different scenarios require distinct approaches for maximum impact. 

To save you time and effort, I have curated a list of 5 versatile case study presentation templates, each designed for specific needs and audiences. 

Here are some best case study presentation examples that showcase effective strategies for engaging your audience and conveying complex information clearly.

1 . Lab report case study template

Ever feel like your research gets lost in a world of endless numbers and jargon? Lab case studies are your way out!

Think of it as building a bridge between your cool experiment and everyone else. It’s more than just reporting results – it’s explaining the “why” and “how” in a way that grabs attention and makes sense.

This lap report template acts as a blueprint for your report, guiding you through each essential section (introduction, methods, results, etc.) in a logical order.

Want to present your research like a pro? Browse our research presentation template gallery for creative inspiration!

2. Product case study template

It’s time you ditch those boring slideshows and bullet points because I’ve got a better way to win over clients: product case study templates.

Instead of just listing features and benefits, you get to create a clear and concise story that shows potential clients exactly what your product can do for them. It’s like painting a picture they can easily visualize, helping them understand the value your product brings to the table.

Grab the template below, fill in the details, and watch as your product’s impact comes to life!

3. Content marketing case study template

In digital marketing, showcasing your accomplishments is as vital as achieving them. 

A well-crafted case study not only acts as a testament to your successes but can also serve as an instructional tool for others. 

With this coral content marketing case study template—a perfect blend of vibrant design and structured documentation, you can narrate your marketing triumphs effectively.

4. Case study psychology template

Understanding how people tick is one of psychology’s biggest quests and case studies are like magnifying glasses for the mind. They offer in-depth looks at real-life behaviors, emotions and thought processes, revealing fascinating insights into what makes us human.

Writing a top-notch case study, though, can be a challenge. It requires careful organization, clear presentation and meticulous attention to detail. That’s where a good case study psychology template comes in handy.

Think of it as a helpful guide, taking care of formatting and structure while you focus on the juicy content. No more wrestling with layouts or margins – just pour your research magic into crafting a compelling narrative.

5. Lead generation case study template

Lead generation can be a real head-scratcher. But here’s a little help: a lead generation case study.

Think of it like a friendly handshake and a confident resume all rolled into one. It’s your chance to showcase your expertise, share real-world successes and offer valuable insights. Potential clients get to see your track record, understand your approach and decide if you’re the right fit.

No need to start from scratch, though. This lead generation case study template guides you step-by-step through crafting a clear, compelling narrative that highlights your wins and offers actionable tips for others. Fill in the gaps with your specific data and strategies, and voilà! You’ve got a powerful tool to attract new customers.

Related: 15+ Professional Case Study Examples [Design Tips + Templates]

So, you’ve spent hours crafting the perfect case study and are now tasked with presenting it. Crafting the case study is only half the battle; delivering it effectively is equally important. 

Whether you’re facing a room of executives, academics or potential clients, how you present your findings can make a significant difference in how your work is received. 

Forget boring reports and snooze-inducing presentations! Let’s make your case study sing. Here are some key pointers to turn information into an engaging and persuasive performance:

• Know your audience : Tailor your presentation to the knowledge level and interests of your audience. Remember to use language and examples that resonate with them.
• Rehearse : Rehearsing your case study presentation is the key to a smooth delivery and for ensuring that you stay within the allotted time. Practice helps you fine-tune your pacing, hone your speaking skills with good word pronunciations and become comfortable with the material, leading to a more confident, conversational and effective presentation.
• Start strong : Open with a compelling introduction that grabs your audience’s attention. You might want to use an interesting statistic, a provocative question or a brief story that sets the stage for your case study.
• Be clear and concise : Avoid jargon and overly complex sentences. Get to the point quickly and stay focused on your objectives.
• Use visual aids : Incorporate slides with graphics, charts or videos to supplement your verbal presentation. Make sure they are easy to read and understand.
• Tell a story : Use storytelling techniques to make the case study more engaging. A well-told narrative can help you make complex data more relatable and easier to digest.

Ditching the dry reports and slide decks? Venngage’s case study templates let you wow customers with your solutions and gain insights to improve your business plan. Pre-built templates, visual magic and customer captivation – all just a click away. Go tell your story and watch them say “wow!”

Nailed your case study, but want to make your presentation even stronger? Avoid these common mistakes to ensure your audience gets the most out of it:

Overloading with information

A case study is not an encyclopedia. Overloading your presentation with excessive data, text or jargon can make it cumbersome and difficult for the audience to digest the key points. Stick to what’s essential and impactful. Need help making your data clear and impactful? Our data presentation templates can help! Find clear and engaging visuals to showcase your findings.

Lack of structure

Jumping haphazardly between points or topics can confuse your audience. A well-structured presentation, with a logical flow from introduction to conclusion, is crucial for effective communication.

Ignoring the audience

Different audiences have different needs and levels of understanding. Failing to adapt your presentation to your audience can result in a disconnect and a less impactful presentation.

Poor visual elements

While content is king, poor design or lack of visual elements can make your case study dull or hard to follow. Make sure you use high-quality images, graphs and other visual aids to support your narrative.

Not focusing on results

A case study aims to showcase a problem and its solution, but what most people care about are the results. Failing to highlight or adequately explain the outcomes can make your presentation fall flat.

How to start a case study presentation?

Starting a case study presentation effectively involves a few key steps:

• Grab attention : Open with a hook—an intriguing statistic, a provocative question or a compelling visual—to engage your audience from the get-go.
• Set the stage : Briefly introduce the subject, context and relevance of the case study to give your audience an idea of what to expect.
• Outline objectives : Clearly state what the case study aims to achieve. Are you solving a problem, proving a point or showcasing a success?
• Agenda : Give a quick outline of the key sections or topics you’ll cover to help the audience follow along.
• Set expectations : Let your audience know what you want them to take away from the presentation, whether it’s knowledge, inspiration or a call to action.

How to present a case study on PowerPoint and on Google Slides?

Presenting a case study on PowerPoint and Google Slides involves a structured approach for clarity and impact using presentation slides :

• Title slide : Start with a title slide that includes the name of the case study, your name and any relevant institutional affiliations.
• Introduction : Follow with a slide that outlines the problem or situation your case study addresses. Include a hook to engage the audience.
• Objectives : Clearly state the goals of the case study in a dedicated slide.
• Findings : Use charts, graphs and bullet points to present your findings succinctly.
• Analysis : Discuss what the findings mean, drawing on supporting data or secondary research as necessary.
• Conclusion : Summarize key takeaways and results.
• Q&A : End with a slide inviting questions from the audience.

What’s the role of analysis in a case study presentation?

The role of analysis in a case study presentation is to interpret the data and findings, providing context and meaning to them. 

It helps your audience understand the implications of the case study, connects the dots between the problem and the solution and may offer recommendations for future action.

Is it important to include real data and results in the presentation?

Yes, including real data and results in a case study presentation is crucial to show experience,  credibility and impact. Authentic data lends weight to your findings and conclusions, enabling the audience to trust your analysis and take your recommendations more seriously

How do I conclude a case study presentation effectively?

To conclude a case study presentation effectively, summarize the key findings, insights and recommendations in a clear and concise manner. 

End with a strong call-to-action or a thought-provoking question to leave a lasting impression on your audience.

What’s the best way to showcase data in a case study presentation ?

The best way to showcase data in a case study presentation is through visual aids like charts, graphs and infographics which make complex information easily digestible, engaging and creative. 

Don’t just report results, visualize them! This template for example lets you transform your social media case study into a captivating infographic that sparks conversation.

Choose the type of visual that best represents the data you’re showing; for example, use bar charts for comparisons or pie charts for parts of a whole. 

Ensure that the visuals are high-quality and clearly labeled, so the audience can quickly grasp the key points. 

Keep the design consistent and simple, avoiding clutter or overly complex visuals that could distract from the message.

Choose a template that perfectly suits your case study where you can utilize different visual aids for maximum impact. 

Need more inspiration on how to turn numbers into impact with the help of infographics? Our ready-to-use infographic templates take the guesswork out of creating visual impact for your case studies with just a few clicks.

Related: 10+ Case Study Infographic Templates That Convert

Congrats on mastering the art of compelling case study presentations! This guide has equipped you with all the essentials, from structure and nuances to avoiding common pitfalls. You’re ready to impress any audience, whether in the boardroom, the classroom or beyond.

And remember, you’re not alone in this journey. Venngage’s Case Study Creator is your trusty companion, ready to elevate your presentations from ordinary to extraordinary. So, let your confidence shine, leverage your newly acquired skills and prepare to deliver presentations that truly resonate.

Go forth and make a lasting impact!

Research Writing and Analysis

• NVivo Group and Study Sessions
• SPSS This link opens in a new window
• Statistical Analysis Group sessions
• Using Qualtrics
• Dissertation and Data Analysis Group Sessions
• Defense Schedule - Commons Calendar This link opens in a new window
• Research Process Flow Chart
• Research Alignment Chapter 1 This link opens in a new window
• Step 1: Seek Out Evidence
• Step 2: Explain
• Step 3: The Big Picture
• Step 4: Own It
• Step 5: Illustrate
• Annotated Bibliography
• Literature Review This link opens in a new window
• Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analyses
• How to Synthesize and Analyze
• Synthesis and Analysis Practice
• Synthesis and Analysis Group Sessions
• Problem Statement
• Purpose Statement
• Conceptual Framework
• Theoretical Framework
• Quantitative Research Questions
• Qualitative Research Questions
• Trustworthiness of Qualitative Data
• Analysis and Coding Example- Qualitative Data
• Thematic Data Analysis in Qualitative Design
• Dissertation to Journal Article This link opens in a new window
• International Journal of Online Graduate Education (IJOGE) This link opens in a new window
• Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning (JRIT&L) This link opens in a new window

Writing a Case Study

What is a case study?

A Case study is: 

• An in-depth research design that primarily uses a qualitative methodology but sometimes​​ includes quantitative methodology.
• Used to examine an identifiable problem confirmed through research.
• Used to investigate an individual, group of people, organization, or event.
• Used to mostly answer "how" and "why" questions.

What are the different types of case studies?

Note: These are the primary case studies. As you continue to research and learn

about case studies you will begin to find a robust list of different types. 

Who are your case study participants?

What is triangulation ? 

Validity and credibility are an essential part of the case study. Therefore, the researcher should include triangulation to ensure trustworthiness while accurately reflecting what the researcher seeks to investigate.

How to write a Case Study?

When developing a case study, there are different ways you could present the information, but remember to include the five parts for your case study.

Was this resource helpful?

• << Previous: Thematic Data Analysis in Qualitative Design
• Next: Journal Article Reporting Standards (JARS) >>
• Last Updated: Apr 22, 2024 4:50 PM
• URL: https://resources.nu.edu/researchtools

• Open access
• Published: 10 November 2020

Case study research for better evaluations of complex interventions: rationale and challenges

• Sara Paparini   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1909-2481 1 ,
• Judith Green 2 ,
• Chrysanthi Papoutsi 1 ,
• Jamie Murdoch 3 ,
• Mark Petticrew 4 ,
• Trish Greenhalgh 1 ,
• Benjamin Hanckel 5 &
• Sara Shaw 1  

BMC Medicine volume  18 , Article number:  301 ( 2020 ) Cite this article

17k Accesses

41 Citations

35 Altmetric

Metrics details

The need for better methods for evaluation in health research has been widely recognised. The ‘complexity turn’ has drawn attention to the limitations of relying on causal inference from randomised controlled trials alone for understanding whether, and under which conditions, interventions in complex systems improve health services or the public health, and what mechanisms might link interventions and outcomes. We argue that case study research—currently denigrated as poor evidence—is an under-utilised resource for not only providing evidence about context and transferability, but also for helping strengthen causal inferences when pathways between intervention and effects are likely to be non-linear.

Case study research, as an overall approach, is based on in-depth explorations of complex phenomena in their natural, or real-life, settings. Empirical case studies typically enable dynamic understanding of complex challenges and provide evidence about causal mechanisms and the necessary and sufficient conditions (contexts) for intervention implementation and effects. This is essential evidence not just for researchers concerned about internal and external validity, but also research users in policy and practice who need to know what the likely effects of complex programmes or interventions will be in their settings. The health sciences have much to learn from scholarship on case study methodology in the social sciences. However, there are multiple challenges in fully exploiting the potential learning from case study research. First are misconceptions that case study research can only provide exploratory or descriptive evidence. Second, there is little consensus about what a case study is, and considerable diversity in how empirical case studies are conducted and reported. Finally, as case study researchers typically (and appropriately) focus on thick description (that captures contextual detail), it can be challenging to identify the key messages related to intervention evaluation from case study reports.

Whilst the diversity of published case studies in health services and public health research is rich and productive, we recommend further clarity and specific methodological guidance for those reporting case study research for evaluation audiences.

Peer Review reports

The need for methodological development to address the most urgent challenges in health research has been well-documented. Many of the most pressing questions for public health research, where the focus is on system-level determinants [ 1 , 2 ], and for health services research, where provisions typically vary across sites and are provided through interlocking networks of services [ 3 ], require methodological approaches that can attend to complexity. The need for methodological advance has arisen, in part, as a result of the diminishing returns from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where they have been used to answer questions about the effects of interventions in complex systems [ 4 , 5 , 6 ]. In conditions of complexity, there is limited value in maintaining the current orientation to experimental trial designs in the health sciences as providing ‘gold standard’ evidence of effect.

There are increasing calls for methodological pluralism [ 7 , 8 ], with the recognition that complex intervention and context are not easily or usefully separated (as is often the situation when using trial design), and that system interruptions may have effects that are not reducible to linear causal pathways between intervention and outcome. These calls are reflected in a shifting and contested discourse of trial design, seen with the emergence of realist [ 9 ], adaptive and hybrid (types 1, 2 and 3) [ 10 , 11 ] trials that blend studies of effectiveness with a close consideration of the contexts of implementation. Similarly, process evaluation has now become a core component of complex healthcare intervention trials, reflected in MRC guidance on how to explore implementation, causal mechanisms and context [ 12 ].

Evidence about the context of an intervention is crucial for questions of external validity. As Woolcock [ 4 ] notes, even if RCT designs are accepted as robust for maximising internal validity, questions of transferability (how well the intervention works in different contexts) and generalisability (how well the intervention can be scaled up) remain unanswered [ 5 , 13 ]. For research evidence to have impact on policy and systems organisation, and thus to improve population and patient health, there is an urgent need for better methods for strengthening external validity, including a better understanding of the relationship between intervention and context [ 14 ].

Policymakers, healthcare commissioners and other research users require credible evidence of relevance to their settings and populations [ 15 ], to perform what Rosengarten and Savransky [ 16 ] call ‘careful abstraction’ to the locales that matter for them. They also require robust evidence for understanding complex causal pathways. Case study research, currently under-utilised in public health and health services evaluation, can offer considerable potential for strengthening faith in both external and internal validity. For example, in an empirical case study of how the policy of free bus travel had specific health effects in London, UK, a quasi-experimental evaluation (led by JG) identified how important aspects of context (a good public transport system) and intervention (that it was universal) were necessary conditions for the observed effects, thus providing useful, actionable evidence for decision-makers in other contexts [ 17 ].

The overall approach of case study research is based on the in-depth exploration of complex phenomena in their natural, or ‘real-life’, settings. Empirical case studies typically enable dynamic understanding of complex challenges rather than restricting the focus on narrow problem delineations and simple fixes. Case study research is a diverse and somewhat contested field, with multiple definitions and perspectives grounded in different ways of viewing the world, and involving different combinations of methods. In this paper, we raise awareness of such plurality and highlight the contribution that case study research can make to the evaluation of complex system-level interventions. We review some of the challenges in exploiting the current evidence base from empirical case studies and conclude by recommending that further guidance and minimum reporting criteria for evaluation using case studies, appropriate for audiences in the health sciences, can enhance the take-up of evidence from case study research.

Case study research offers evidence about context, causal inference in complex systems and implementation

Well-conducted and described empirical case studies provide evidence on context, complexity and mechanisms for understanding how, where and why interventions have their observed effects. Recognition of the importance of context for understanding the relationships between interventions and outcomes is hardly new. In 1943, Canguilhem berated an over-reliance on experimental designs for determining universal physiological laws: ‘As if one could determine a phenomenon’s essence apart from its conditions! As if conditions were a mask or frame which changed neither the face nor the picture!’ ([ 18 ] p126). More recently, a concern with context has been expressed in health systems and public health research as part of what has been called the ‘complexity turn’ [ 1 ]: a recognition that many of the most enduring challenges for developing an evidence base require a consideration of system-level effects [ 1 ] and the conceptualisation of interventions as interruptions in systems [ 19 ].

The case study approach is widely recognised as offering an invaluable resource for understanding the dynamic and evolving influence of context on complex, system-level interventions [ 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ]. Empirically, case studies can directly inform assessments of where, when, how and for whom interventions might be successfully implemented, by helping to specify the necessary and sufficient conditions under which interventions might have effects and to consolidate learning on how interdependencies, emergence and unpredictability can be managed to achieve and sustain desired effects. Case study research has the potential to address four objectives for improving research and reporting of context recently set out by guidance on taking account of context in population health research [ 24 ], that is to (1) improve the appropriateness of intervention development for specific contexts, (2) improve understanding of ‘how’ interventions work, (3) better understand how and why impacts vary across contexts and (4) ensure reports of intervention studies are most useful for decision-makers and researchers.

However, evaluations of complex healthcare interventions have arguably not exploited the full potential of case study research and can learn much from other disciplines. For evaluative research, exploratory case studies have had a traditional role of providing data on ‘process’, or initial ‘hypothesis-generating’ scoping, but might also have an increasing salience for explanatory aims. Across the social and political sciences, different kinds of case studies are undertaken to meet diverse aims (description, exploration or explanation) and across different scales (from small N qualitative studies that aim to elucidate processes, or provide thick description, to more systematic techniques designed for medium-to-large N cases).

Case studies with explanatory aims vary in terms of their positioning within mixed-methods projects, with designs including (but not restricted to) (1) single N of 1 studies of interventions in specific contexts, where the overall design is a case study that may incorporate one or more (randomised or not) comparisons over time and between variables within the case; (2) a series of cases conducted or synthesised to provide explanation from variations between cases; and (3) case studies of particular settings within RCT or quasi-experimental designs to explore variation in effects or implementation.

Detailed qualitative research (typically done as ‘case studies’ within process evaluations) provides evidence for the plausibility of mechanisms [ 25 ], offering theoretical generalisations for how interventions may function under different conditions. Although RCT designs reduce many threats to internal validity, the mechanisms of effect remain opaque, particularly when the causal pathways between ‘intervention’ and ‘effect’ are long and potentially non-linear: case study research has a more fundamental role here, in providing detailed observational evidence for causal claims [ 26 ] as well as producing a rich, nuanced picture of tensions and multiple perspectives [ 8 ].

Longitudinal or cross-case analysis may be best suited for evidence generation in system-level evaluative research. Turner [ 27 ], for instance, reflecting on the complex processes in major system change, has argued for the need for methods that integrate learning across cases, to develop theoretical knowledge that would enable inferences beyond the single case, and to develop generalisable theory about organisational and structural change in health systems. Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) [ 28 ] is one such formal method for deriving causal claims, using set theory mathematics to integrate data from empirical case studies to answer questions about the configurations of causal pathways linking conditions to outcomes [ 29 , 30 ].

Nonetheless, the single N case study, too, provides opportunities for theoretical development [ 31 ], and theoretical generalisation or analytical refinement [ 32 ]. How ‘the case’ and ‘context’ are conceptualised is crucial here. Findings from the single case may seem to be confined to its intrinsic particularities in a specific and distinct context [ 33 ]. However, if such context is viewed as exemplifying wider social and political forces, the single case can be ‘telling’, rather than ‘typical’, and offer insight into a wider issue [ 34 ]. Internal comparisons within the case can offer rich possibilities for logical inferences about causation [ 17 ]. Further, case studies of any size can be used for theory testing through refutation [ 22 ]. The potential lies, then, in utilising the strengths and plurality of case study to support theory-driven research within different methodological paradigms.

Evaluation research in health has much to learn from a range of social sciences where case study methodology has been used to develop various kinds of causal inference. For instance, Gerring [ 35 ] expands on the within-case variations utilised to make causal claims. For Gerring [ 35 ], case studies come into their own with regard to invariant or strong causal claims (such as X is a necessary and/or sufficient condition for Y) rather than for probabilistic causal claims. For the latter (where experimental methods might have an advantage in estimating effect sizes), case studies offer evidence on mechanisms: from observations of X affecting Y, from process tracing or from pattern matching. Case studies also support the study of emergent causation, that is, the multiple interacting properties that account for particular and unexpected outcomes in complex systems, such as in healthcare [ 8 ].

Finally, efficacy (or beliefs about efficacy) is not the only contributor to intervention uptake, with a range of organisational and policy contingencies affecting whether an intervention is likely to be rolled out in practice. Case study research is, therefore, invaluable for learning about contextual contingencies and identifying the conditions necessary for interventions to become normalised (i.e. implemented routinely) in practice [ 36 ].

The challenges in exploiting evidence from case study research

At present, there are significant challenges in exploiting the benefits of case study research in evaluative health research, which relate to status, definition and reporting. Case study research has been marginalised at the bottom of an evidence hierarchy, seen to offer little by way of explanatory power, if nonetheless useful for adding descriptive data on process or providing useful illustrations for policymakers [ 37 ]. This is an opportune moment to revisit this low status. As health researchers are increasingly charged with evaluating ‘natural experiments’—the use of face masks in the response to the COVID-19 pandemic being a recent example [ 38 ]—rather than interventions that take place in settings that can be controlled, research approaches using methods to strengthen causal inference that does not require randomisation become more relevant.

A second challenge for improving the use of case study evidence in evaluative health research is that, as we have seen, what is meant by ‘case study’ varies widely, not only across but also within disciplines. There is indeed little consensus amongst methodologists as to how to define ‘a case study’. Definitions focus, variously, on small sample size or lack of control over the intervention (e.g. [ 39 ] p194), on in-depth study and context [ 40 , 41 ], on the logic of inference used [ 35 ] or on distinct research strategies which incorporate a number of methods to address questions of ‘how’ and ‘why’ [ 42 ]. Moreover, definitions developed for specific disciplines do not capture the range of ways in which case study research is carried out across disciplines. Multiple definitions of case study reflect the richness and diversity of the approach. However, evidence suggests that a lack of consensus across methodologists results in some of the limitations of published reports of empirical case studies [ 43 , 44 ]. Hyett and colleagues [ 43 ], for instance, reviewing reports in qualitative journals, found little match between methodological definitions of case study research and how authors used the term.

This raises the third challenge we identify that case study reports are typically not written in ways that are accessible or useful for the evaluation research community and policymakers. Case studies may not appear in journals widely read by those in the health sciences, either because space constraints preclude the reporting of rich, thick descriptions, or because of the reported lack of willingness of some biomedical journals to publish research that uses qualitative methods [ 45 ], signalling the persistence of the aforementioned evidence hierarchy. Where they do, however, the term ‘case study’ is used to indicate, interchangeably, a qualitative study, an N of 1 sample, or a multi-method, in-depth analysis of one example from a population of phenomena. Definitions of what constitutes the ‘case’ are frequently lacking and appear to be used as a synonym for the settings in which the research is conducted. Despite offering insights for evaluation, the primary aims may not have been evaluative, so the implications may not be explicitly drawn out. Indeed, some case study reports might properly be aiming for thick description without necessarily seeking to inform about context or causality.

Acknowledging plurality and developing guidance

We recognise that definitional and methodological plurality is not only inevitable, but also a necessary and creative reflection of the very different epistemological and disciplinary origins of health researchers, and the aims they have in doing and reporting case study research. Indeed, to provide some clarity, Thomas [ 46 ] has suggested a typology of subject/purpose/approach/process for classifying aims (e.g. evaluative or exploratory), sample rationale and selection and methods for data generation of case studies. We also recognise that the diversity of methods used in case study research, and the necessary focus on narrative reporting, does not lend itself to straightforward development of formal quality or reporting criteria.

Existing checklists for reporting case study research from the social sciences—for example Lincoln and Guba’s [ 47 ] and Stake’s [ 33 ]—are primarily orientated to the quality of narrative produced, and the extent to which they encapsulate thick description, rather than the more pragmatic issues of implications for intervention effects. Those designed for clinical settings, such as the CARE (CAse REports) guidelines, provide specific reporting guidelines for medical case reports about single, or small groups of patients [ 48 ], not for case study research.

The Design of Case Study Research in Health Care (DESCARTE) model [ 44 ] suggests a series of questions to be asked of a case study researcher (including clarity about the philosophy underpinning their research), study design (with a focus on case definition) and analysis (to improve process). The model resembles toolkits for enhancing the quality and robustness of qualitative and mixed-methods research reporting, and it is usefully open-ended and non-prescriptive. However, even if it does include some reflections on context, the model does not fully address aspects of context, logic and causal inference that are perhaps most relevant for evaluative research in health.

Hence, for evaluative research where the aim is to report empirical findings in ways that are intended to be pragmatically useful for health policy and practice, this may be an opportune time to consider how to best navigate plurality around what is (minimally) important to report when publishing empirical case studies, especially with regards to the complex relationships between context and interventions, information that case study research is well placed to provide.

The conventional scientific quest for certainty, predictability and linear causality (maximised in RCT designs) has to be augmented by the study of uncertainty, unpredictability and emergent causality [ 8 ] in complex systems. This will require methodological pluralism, and openness to broadening the evidence base to better understand both causality in and the transferability of system change intervention [ 14 , 20 , 23 , 25 ]. Case study research evidence is essential, yet is currently under exploited in the health sciences. If evaluative health research is to move beyond the current impasse on methods for understanding interventions as interruptions in complex systems, we need to consider in more detail how researchers can conduct and report empirical case studies which do aim to elucidate the contextual factors which interact with interventions to produce particular effects. To this end, supported by the UK’s Medical Research Council, we are embracing the challenge to develop guidance for case study researchers studying complex interventions. Following a meta-narrative review of the literature, we are planning a Delphi study to inform guidance that will, at minimum, cover the value of case study research for evaluating the interrelationship between context and complex system-level interventions; for situating and defining ‘the case’, and generalising from case studies; as well as provide specific guidance on conducting, analysing and reporting case study research. Our hope is that such guidance can support researchers evaluating interventions in complex systems to better exploit the diversity and richness of case study research.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable (article based on existing available academic publications)

Abbreviations

Qualitative comparative analysis

Quasi-experimental design

Randomised controlled trial

Diez Roux AV. Complex systems thinking and current impasses in health disparities research. Am J Public Health. 2011;101(9):1627–34.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ogilvie D, Mitchell R, Mutrie N, M P, Platt S. Evaluating health effects of transport interventions: methodologic case study. Am J Prev Med 2006;31:118–126.

Walshe C. The evaluation of complex interventions in palliative care: an exploration of the potential of case study research strategies. Palliat Med. 2011;25(8):774–81.

Woolcock M. Using case studies to explore the external validity of ‘complex’ development interventions. Evaluation. 2013;19:229–48.

Cartwright N. Are RCTs the gold standard? BioSocieties. 2007;2(1):11–20.

Deaton A, Cartwright N. Understanding and misunderstanding randomized controlled trials. Soc Sci Med. 2018;210:2–21.

Salway S, Green J. Towards a critical complex systems approach to public health. Crit Public Health. 2017;27(5):523–4.

Greenhalgh T, Papoutsi C. Studying complexity in health services research: desperately seeking an overdue paradigm shift. BMC Med. 2018;16(1):95.

Bonell C, Warren E, Fletcher A. Realist trials and the testing of context-mechanism-outcome configurations: a response to Van Belle et al. Trials. 2016;17:478.

Pallmann P, Bedding AW, Choodari-Oskooei B. Adaptive designs in clinical trials: why use them, and how to run and report them. BMC Med. 2018;16:29.

Curran G, Bauer M, Mittman B, Pyne J, Stetler C. Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs: combining elements of clinical effectiveness and implementation research to enhance public health impact. Med Care. 2012;50(3):217–26. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182408812 .

Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2015 [cited 2020 Jun 27];350. Available from: https://www.bmj.com/content/350/bmj.h1258 .

Evans RE, Craig P, Hoddinott P, Littlecott H, Moore L, Murphy S, et al. When and how do ‘effective’ interventions need to be adapted and/or re-evaluated in new contexts? The need for guidance. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2019;73(6):481–2.

Shoveller J. A critical examination of representations of context within research on population health interventions. Crit Public Health. 2016;26(5):487–500.

Treweek S, Zwarenstein M. Making trials matter: pragmatic and explanatory trials and the problem of applicability. Trials. 2009;10(1):37.

Rosengarten M, Savransky M. A careful biomedicine? Generalization and abstraction in RCTs. Crit Public Health. 2019;29(2):181–91.

Green J, Roberts H, Petticrew M, Steinbach R, Goodman A, Jones A, et al. Integrating quasi-experimental and inductive designs in evaluation: a case study of the impact of free bus travel on public health. Evaluation. 2015;21(4):391–406.

Canguilhem G. The normal and the pathological. New York: Zone Books; 1991. (1949).

Google Scholar  

Hawe P, Shiell A, Riley T. Theorising interventions as events in systems. Am J Community Psychol. 2009;43:267–76.

King G, Keohane RO, Verba S. Designing social inquiry: scientific inference in qualitative research: Princeton University Press; 1994.

Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O. Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q. 2004;82(4):581–629.

Yin R. Enhancing the quality of case studies in health services research. Health Serv Res. 1999;34(5 Pt 2):1209.

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Raine R, Fitzpatrick R, Barratt H, Bevan G, Black N, Boaden R, et al. Challenges, solutions and future directions in the evaluation of service innovations in health care and public health. Health Serv Deliv Res. 2016 [cited 2020 Jun 30];4(16). Available from: https://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hsdr/hsdr04160#/abstract .

Craig P, Di Ruggiero E, Frohlich KL, E M, White M, Group CCGA. Taking account of context in population health intervention research: guidance for producers, users and funders of research. NIHR Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre; 2018.

Grant RL, Hood R. Complex systems, explanation and policy: implications of the crisis of replication for public health research. Crit Public Health. 2017;27(5):525–32.

Mahoney J. Strategies of causal inference in small-N analysis. Sociol Methods Res. 2000;4:387–424.

Turner S. Major system change: a management and organisational research perspective. In: Rosalind Raine, Ray Fitzpatrick, Helen Barratt, Gywn Bevan, Nick Black, Ruth Boaden, et al. Challenges, solutions and future directions in the evaluation of service innovations in health care and public health. Health Serv Deliv Res. 2016;4(16) 2016. https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr04160.

Ragin CC. Using qualitative comparative analysis to study causal complexity. Health Serv Res. 1999;34(5 Pt 2):1225.

Hanckel B, Petticrew M, Thomas J, Green J. Protocol for a systematic review of the use of qualitative comparative analysis for evaluative questions in public health research. Syst Rev. 2019;8(1):252.

Schneider CQ, Wagemann C. Set-theoretic methods for the social sciences: a guide to qualitative comparative analysis: Cambridge University Press; 2012. 369 p.

Flyvbjerg B. Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qual Inq. 2006;12:219–45.

Tsoukas H. Craving for generality and small-N studies: a Wittgensteinian approach towards the epistemology of the particular in organization and management studies. Sage Handb Organ Res Methods. 2009:285–301.

Stake RE. The art of case study research. London: Sage Publications Ltd; 1995.

Mitchell JC. Typicality and the case study. Ethnographic research: A guide to general conduct. Vol. 238241. 1984.

Gerring J. What is a case study and what is it good for? Am Polit Sci Rev. 2004;98(2):341–54.

May C, Mort M, Williams T, F M, Gask L. Health technology assessment in its local contexts: studies of telehealthcare. Soc Sci Med 2003;57:697–710.

McGill E. Trading quality for relevance: non-health decision-makers’ use of evidence on the social determinants of health. BMJ Open. 2015;5(4):007053.

Greenhalgh T. We can’t be 100% sure face masks work – but that shouldn’t stop us wearing them | Trish Greenhalgh. The Guardian. 2020 [cited 2020 Jun 27]; Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/05/face-masks-coronavirus .

Hammersley M. So, what are case studies? In: What’s wrong with ethnography? New York: Routledge; 1992.

Crowe S, Cresswell K, Robertson A, Huby G, Avery A, Sheikh A. The case study approach. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11(1):100.

Luck L, Jackson D, Usher K. Case study: a bridge across the paradigms. Nurs Inq. 2006;13(2):103–9.

Yin RK. Case study research and applications: design and methods: Sage; 2017.

Hyett N, A K, Dickson-Swift V. Methodology or method? A critical review of qualitative case study reports. Int J Qual Stud Health Well-Being. 2014;9:23606.

Carolan CM, Forbat L, Smith A. Developing the DESCARTE model: the design of case study research in health care. Qual Health Res. 2016;26(5):626–39.

Greenhalgh T, Annandale E, Ashcroft R, Barlow J, Black N, Bleakley A, et al. An open letter to the BMJ editors on qualitative research. Bmj. 2016;352.

Thomas G. A typology for the case study in social science following a review of definition, discourse, and structure. Qual Inq. 2011;17(6):511–21.

Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Judging the quality of case study reports. Int J Qual Stud Educ. 1990;3(1):53–9.

Riley DS, Barber MS, Kienle GS, Aronson JK, Schoen-Angerer T, Tugwell P, et al. CARE guidelines for case reports: explanation and elaboration document. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;89:218–35.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable

This work was funded by the Medical Research Council - MRC Award MR/S014632/1 HCS: Case study, Context and Complex interventions (TRIPLE C). SP was additionally funded by the University of Oxford's Higher Education Innovation Fund (HEIF).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Sara Paparini, Chrysanthi Papoutsi, Trish Greenhalgh & Sara Shaw

Wellcome Centre for Cultures & Environments of Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK

Judith Green

School of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

Jamie Murdoch

Public Health, Environments and Society, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicin, London, UK

Mark Petticrew

Institute for Culture and Society, Western Sydney University, Penrith, Australia

Benjamin Hanckel

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

JG, MP, SP, JM, TG, CP and SS drafted the initial paper; all authors contributed to the drafting of the final version, and read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sara Paparini .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate, consent for publication, competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Paparini, S., Green, J., Papoutsi, C. et al. Case study research for better evaluations of complex interventions: rationale and challenges. BMC Med 18 , 301 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-01777-6

Download citation

Received : 03 July 2020

Accepted : 07 September 2020

Published : 10 November 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-01777-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Qualitative
• Case studies
• Mixed-method
• Public health
• Health services research
• Interventions

BMC Medicine

ISSN: 1741-7015

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

• Privacy Policy

Buy Me a Coffee

Home » Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Table of Contents

A case study is a research method that involves an in-depth examination and analysis of a particular phenomenon or case, such as an individual, organization, community, event, or situation.

It is a qualitative research approach that aims to provide a detailed and comprehensive understanding of the case being studied. Case studies typically involve multiple sources of data, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts, which are analyzed using various techniques, such as content analysis, thematic analysis, and grounded theory. The findings of a case study are often used to develop theories, inform policy or practice, or generate new research questions.

Types of Case Study

Types and Methods of Case Study are as follows:

Single-Case Study

A single-case study is an in-depth analysis of a single case. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to understand a specific phenomenon in detail.

For Example , A researcher might conduct a single-case study on a particular individual to understand their experiences with a particular health condition or a specific organization to explore their management practices. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of a single-case study are often used to generate new research questions, develop theories, or inform policy or practice.

Multiple-Case Study

A multiple-case study involves the analysis of several cases that are similar in nature. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to identify similarities and differences between the cases.

For Example, a researcher might conduct a multiple-case study on several companies to explore the factors that contribute to their success or failure. The researcher collects data from each case, compares and contrasts the findings, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as comparative analysis or pattern-matching. The findings of a multiple-case study can be used to develop theories, inform policy or practice, or generate new research questions.

Exploratory Case Study

An exploratory case study is used to explore a new or understudied phenomenon. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to generate hypotheses or theories about the phenomenon.

For Example, a researcher might conduct an exploratory case study on a new technology to understand its potential impact on society. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as grounded theory or content analysis. The findings of an exploratory case study can be used to generate new research questions, develop theories, or inform policy or practice.

Descriptive Case Study

A descriptive case study is used to describe a particular phenomenon in detail. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to provide a comprehensive account of the phenomenon.

For Example, a researcher might conduct a descriptive case study on a particular community to understand its social and economic characteristics. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of a descriptive case study can be used to inform policy or practice or generate new research questions.

Instrumental Case Study

An instrumental case study is used to understand a particular phenomenon that is instrumental in achieving a particular goal. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to understand the role of the phenomenon in achieving the goal.

For Example, a researcher might conduct an instrumental case study on a particular policy to understand its impact on achieving a particular goal, such as reducing poverty. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of an instrumental case study can be used to inform policy or practice or generate new research questions.

Case Study Data Collection Methods

Here are some common data collection methods for case studies:

Interviews involve asking questions to individuals who have knowledge or experience relevant to the case study. Interviews can be structured (where the same questions are asked to all participants) or unstructured (where the interviewer follows up on the responses with further questions). Interviews can be conducted in person, over the phone, or through video conferencing.

Observations

Observations involve watching and recording the behavior and activities of individuals or groups relevant to the case study. Observations can be participant (where the researcher actively participates in the activities) or non-participant (where the researcher observes from a distance). Observations can be recorded using notes, audio or video recordings, or photographs.

Documents can be used as a source of information for case studies. Documents can include reports, memos, emails, letters, and other written materials related to the case study. Documents can be collected from the case study participants or from public sources.

Surveys involve asking a set of questions to a sample of individuals relevant to the case study. Surveys can be administered in person, over the phone, through mail or email, or online. Surveys can be used to gather information on attitudes, opinions, or behaviors related to the case study.

Artifacts are physical objects relevant to the case study. Artifacts can include tools, equipment, products, or other objects that provide insights into the case study phenomenon.

How to conduct Case Study Research

Conducting a case study research involves several steps that need to be followed to ensure the quality and rigor of the study. Here are the steps to conduct case study research:

• Define the research questions: The first step in conducting a case study research is to define the research questions. The research questions should be specific, measurable, and relevant to the case study phenomenon under investigation.
• Select the case: The next step is to select the case or cases to be studied. The case should be relevant to the research questions and should provide rich and diverse data that can be used to answer the research questions.
• Collect data: Data can be collected using various methods, such as interviews, observations, documents, surveys, and artifacts. The data collection method should be selected based on the research questions and the nature of the case study phenomenon.
• Analyze the data: The data collected from the case study should be analyzed using various techniques, such as content analysis, thematic analysis, or grounded theory. The analysis should be guided by the research questions and should aim to provide insights and conclusions relevant to the research questions.
• Draw conclusions: The conclusions drawn from the case study should be based on the data analysis and should be relevant to the research questions. The conclusions should be supported by evidence and should be clearly stated.
• Validate the findings: The findings of the case study should be validated by reviewing the data and the analysis with participants or other experts in the field. This helps to ensure the validity and reliability of the findings.
• Write the report: The final step is to write the report of the case study research. The report should provide a clear description of the case study phenomenon, the research questions, the data collection methods, the data analysis, the findings, and the conclusions. The report should be written in a clear and concise manner and should follow the guidelines for academic writing.

Examples of Case Study

Here are some examples of case study research:

• The Hawthorne Studies : Conducted between 1924 and 1932, the Hawthorne Studies were a series of case studies conducted by Elton Mayo and his colleagues to examine the impact of work environment on employee productivity. The studies were conducted at the Hawthorne Works plant of the Western Electric Company in Chicago and included interviews, observations, and experiments.
• The Stanford Prison Experiment: Conducted in 1971, the Stanford Prison Experiment was a case study conducted by Philip Zimbardo to examine the psychological effects of power and authority. The study involved simulating a prison environment and assigning participants to the role of guards or prisoners. The study was controversial due to the ethical issues it raised.
• The Challenger Disaster: The Challenger Disaster was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the Space Shuttle Challenger explosion in 1986. The study included interviews, observations, and analysis of data to identify the technical, organizational, and cultural factors that contributed to the disaster.
• The Enron Scandal: The Enron Scandal was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the Enron Corporation’s bankruptcy in 2001. The study included interviews, analysis of financial data, and review of documents to identify the accounting practices, corporate culture, and ethical issues that led to the company’s downfall.
• The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster : The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the nuclear accident that occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan in 2011. The study included interviews, analysis of data, and review of documents to identify the technical, organizational, and cultural factors that contributed to the disaster.

Application of Case Study

Case studies have a wide range of applications across various fields and industries. Here are some examples:

Business and Management

Case studies are widely used in business and management to examine real-life situations and develop problem-solving skills. Case studies can help students and professionals to develop a deep understanding of business concepts, theories, and best practices.

Case studies are used in healthcare to examine patient care, treatment options, and outcomes. Case studies can help healthcare professionals to develop critical thinking skills, diagnose complex medical conditions, and develop effective treatment plans.

Case studies are used in education to examine teaching and learning practices. Case studies can help educators to develop effective teaching strategies, evaluate student progress, and identify areas for improvement.

Social Sciences

Case studies are widely used in social sciences to examine human behavior, social phenomena, and cultural practices. Case studies can help researchers to develop theories, test hypotheses, and gain insights into complex social issues.

Law and Ethics

Case studies are used in law and ethics to examine legal and ethical dilemmas. Case studies can help lawyers, policymakers, and ethical professionals to develop critical thinking skills, analyze complex cases, and make informed decisions.

Purpose of Case Study

The purpose of a case study is to provide a detailed analysis of a specific phenomenon, issue, or problem in its real-life context. A case study is a qualitative research method that involves the in-depth exploration and analysis of a particular case, which can be an individual, group, organization, event, or community.

The primary purpose of a case study is to generate a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the case, including its history, context, and dynamics. Case studies can help researchers to identify and examine the underlying factors, processes, and mechanisms that contribute to the case and its outcomes. This can help to develop a more accurate and detailed understanding of the case, which can inform future research, practice, or policy.

Case studies can also serve other purposes, including:

• Illustrating a theory or concept: Case studies can be used to illustrate and explain theoretical concepts and frameworks, providing concrete examples of how they can be applied in real-life situations.
• Developing hypotheses: Case studies can help to generate hypotheses about the causal relationships between different factors and outcomes, which can be tested through further research.
• Providing insight into complex issues: Case studies can provide insights into complex and multifaceted issues, which may be difficult to understand through other research methods.
• Informing practice or policy: Case studies can be used to inform practice or policy by identifying best practices, lessons learned, or areas for improvement.

Advantages of Case Study Research

There are several advantages of case study research, including:

• In-depth exploration: Case study research allows for a detailed exploration and analysis of a specific phenomenon, issue, or problem in its real-life context. This can provide a comprehensive understanding of the case and its dynamics, which may not be possible through other research methods.
• Rich data: Case study research can generate rich and detailed data, including qualitative data such as interviews, observations, and documents. This can provide a nuanced understanding of the case and its complexity.
• Holistic perspective: Case study research allows for a holistic perspective of the case, taking into account the various factors, processes, and mechanisms that contribute to the case and its outcomes. This can help to develop a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the case.
• Theory development: Case study research can help to develop and refine theories and concepts by providing empirical evidence and concrete examples of how they can be applied in real-life situations.
• Practical application: Case study research can inform practice or policy by identifying best practices, lessons learned, or areas for improvement.
• Contextualization: Case study research takes into account the specific context in which the case is situated, which can help to understand how the case is influenced by the social, cultural, and historical factors of its environment.

Limitations of Case Study Research

There are several limitations of case study research, including:

• Limited generalizability : Case studies are typically focused on a single case or a small number of cases, which limits the generalizability of the findings. The unique characteristics of the case may not be applicable to other contexts or populations, which may limit the external validity of the research.
• Biased sampling: Case studies may rely on purposive or convenience sampling, which can introduce bias into the sample selection process. This may limit the representativeness of the sample and the generalizability of the findings.
• Subjectivity: Case studies rely on the interpretation of the researcher, which can introduce subjectivity into the analysis. The researcher’s own biases, assumptions, and perspectives may influence the findings, which may limit the objectivity of the research.
• Limited control: Case studies are typically conducted in naturalistic settings, which limits the control that the researcher has over the environment and the variables being studied. This may limit the ability to establish causal relationships between variables.
• Time-consuming: Case studies can be time-consuming to conduct, as they typically involve a detailed exploration and analysis of a specific case. This may limit the feasibility of conducting multiple case studies or conducting case studies in a timely manner.
• Resource-intensive: Case studies may require significant resources, including time, funding, and expertise. This may limit the ability of researchers to conduct case studies in resource-constrained settings.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Questionnaire – Definition, Types, and Examples

Observational Research – Methods and Guide

Quantitative Research – Methods, Types and...

Qualitative Research Methods

Explanatory Research – Types, Methods, Guide

Survey Research – Types, Methods, Examples

All You Wanted to Know About How to Write a Case Study

What do you study in your college? If you are a psychology, sociology, or anthropology student, we bet you might be familiar with what a case study is. This research method is used to study a certain person, group, or situation. In this guide from our dissertation writing service , you will learn how to write a case study professionally, from researching to citing sources properly. Also, we will explore different types of case studies and show you examples — so that you won’t have any other questions left.

What Is a Case Study?

A case study is a subcategory of research design which investigates problems and offers solutions. Case studies can range from academic research studies to corporate promotional tools trying to sell an idea—their scope is quite vast.

What Is the Difference Between a Research Paper and a Case Study?

While research papers turn the reader’s attention to a certain problem, case studies go even further. Case study guidelines require students to pay attention to details, examining issues closely and in-depth using different research methods. For example, case studies may be used to examine court cases if you study Law, or a patient's health history if you study Medicine. Case studies are also used in Marketing, which are thorough, empirically supported analysis of a good or service's performance. Well-designed case studies can be valuable for prospective customers as they can identify and solve the potential customers pain point.

Case studies involve a lot of storytelling – they usually examine particular cases for a person or a group of people. This method of research is very helpful, as it is very practical and can give a lot of hands-on information. Most commonly, the length of the case study is about 500-900 words, which is much less than the length of an average research paper.

The structure of a case study is very similar to storytelling. It has a protagonist or main character, which in your case is actually a problem you are trying to solve. You can use the system of 3 Acts to make it a compelling story. It should have an introduction, rising action, a climax where transformation occurs, falling action, and a solution.

Here is a rough formula for you to use in your case study:

Problem (Act I): > Solution (Act II) > Result (Act III) > Conclusion.

Types of Case Studies

The purpose of a case study is to provide detailed reports on an event, an institution, a place, future customers, or pretty much anything. There are a few common types of case study, but the type depends on the topic. The following are the most common domains where case studies are needed:

• Historical case studies are great to learn from. Historical events have a multitude of source info offering different perspectives. There are always modern parallels where these perspectives can be applied, compared, and thoroughly analyzed.
• Problem-oriented case studies are usually used for solving problems. These are often assigned as theoretical situations where you need to immerse yourself in the situation to examine it. Imagine you’re working for a startup and you’ve just noticed a significant flaw in your product’s design. Before taking it to the senior manager, you want to do a comprehensive study on the issue and provide solutions. On a greater scale, problem-oriented case studies are a vital part of relevant socio-economic discussions.
• Cumulative case studies collect information and offer comparisons. In business, case studies are often used to tell people about the value of a product.
• Critical case studies explore the causes and effects of a certain case.
• Illustrative case studies describe certain events, investigating outcomes and lessons learned.

Need a compelling case study? EssayPro has got you covered. Our experts are ready to provide you with detailed, insightful case studies that capture the essence of real-world scenarios. Elevate your academic work with our professional assistance.

Case Study Format

The case study format is typically made up of eight parts:

• Executive Summary. Explain what you will examine in the case study. Write an overview of the field you’re researching. Make a thesis statement and sum up the results of your observation in a maximum of 2 sentences.
• Background. Provide background information and the most relevant facts. Isolate the issues.
• Case Evaluation. Isolate the sections of the study you want to focus on. In it, explain why something is working or is not working.
• Proposed Solutions. Offer realistic ways to solve what isn’t working or how to improve its current condition. Explain why these solutions work by offering testable evidence.
• Conclusion. Summarize the main points from the case evaluations and proposed solutions. 6. Recommendations. Talk about the strategy that you should choose. Explain why this choice is the most appropriate.
• Implementation. Explain how to put the specific strategies into action.
• References. Provide all the citations.

How to Write a Case Study

Let's discover how to write a case study.

Setting Up the Research

When writing a case study, remember that research should always come first. Reading many different sources and analyzing other points of view will help you come up with more creative solutions. You can also conduct an actual interview to thoroughly investigate the customer story that you'll need for your case study. Including all of the necessary research, writing a case study may take some time. The research process involves doing the following:

• Define your objective. Explain the reason why you’re presenting your subject. Figure out where you will feature your case study; whether it is written, on video, shown as an infographic, streamed as a podcast, etc.
• Determine who will be the right candidate for your case study. Get permission, quotes, and other features that will make your case study effective. Get in touch with your candidate to see if they approve of being part of your work. Study that candidate’s situation and note down what caused it.
• Identify which various consequences could result from the situation. Follow these guidelines on how to start a case study: surf the net to find some general information you might find useful.
• Make a list of credible sources and examine them. Seek out important facts and highlight problems. Always write down your ideas and make sure to brainstorm.
• Focus on several key issues – why they exist, and how they impact your research subject. Think of several unique solutions. Draw from class discussions, readings, and personal experience. When writing a case study, focus on the best solution and explore it in depth. After having all your research in place, writing a case study will be easy. You may first want to check the rubric and criteria of your assignment for the correct case study structure.

Read Also: ' WHAT IS A CREDIBLE SOURCES ?'

Although your instructor might be looking at slightly different criteria, every case study rubric essentially has the same standards. Your professor will want you to exhibit 8 different outcomes:

• Correctly identify the concepts, theories, and practices in the discipline.
• Identify the relevant theories and principles associated with the particular study.
• Evaluate legal and ethical principles and apply them to your decision-making.
• Recognize the global importance and contribution of your case.
• Construct a coherent summary and explanation of the study.
• Demonstrate analytical and critical-thinking skills.
• Explain the interrelationships between the environment and nature.
• Integrate theory and practice of the discipline within the analysis.

Need Case Study DONE FAST?

Pick a topic, tell us your requirements and get your paper on time.

Case Study Outline

Let's look at the structure of an outline based on the issue of the alcoholic addiction of 30 people.

Introduction

• Statement of the issue: Alcoholism is a disease rather than a weakness of character.
• Presentation of the problem: Alcoholism is affecting more than 14 million people in the USA, which makes it the third most common mental illness there.
• Explanation of the terms: In the past, alcoholism was commonly referred to as alcohol dependence or alcohol addiction. Alcoholism is now the more severe stage of this addiction in the disorder spectrum.
• Hypotheses: Drinking in excess can lead to the use of other drugs.
• Importance of your story: How the information you present can help people with their addictions.
• Background of the story: Include an explanation of why you chose this topic.
• Presentation of analysis and data: Describe the criteria for choosing 30 candidates, the structure of the interview, and the outcomes.
• Strong argument 1: ex. X% of candidates dealing with anxiety and depression...
• Strong argument 2: ex. X amount of people started drinking by their mid-teens.
• Strong argument 3: ex. X% of respondents’ parents had issues with alcohol.
• Concluding statement: I have researched if alcoholism is a disease and found out that…
• Recommendations: Ways and actions for preventing alcohol use.

Writing a Case Study Draft

After you’ve done your case study research and written the outline, it’s time to focus on the draft. In a draft, you have to develop and write your case study by using: the data which you collected throughout the research, interviews, and the analysis processes that were undertaken. Follow these rules for the draft:

• Your draft should contain at least 4 sections: an introduction; a body where you should include background information, an explanation of why you decided to do this case study, and a presentation of your main findings; a conclusion where you present data; and references.
• In the introduction, you should set the pace very clearly. You can even raise a question or quote someone you interviewed in the research phase. It must provide adequate background information on the topic. The background may include analyses of previous studies on your topic. Include the aim of your case here as well. Think of it as a thesis statement. The aim must describe the purpose of your work—presenting the issues that you want to tackle. Include background information, such as photos or videos you used when doing the research.
• Describe your unique research process, whether it was through interviews, observations, academic journals, etc. The next point includes providing the results of your research. Tell the audience what you found out. Why is this important, and what could be learned from it? Discuss the real implications of the problem and its significance in the world.
• Include quotes and data (such as findings, percentages, and awards). This will add a personal touch and better credibility to the case you present. Explain what results you find during your interviews in regards to the problem and how it developed. Also, write about solutions which have already been proposed by other people who have already written about this case.
• At the end of your case study, you should offer possible solutions, but don’t worry about solving them yourself.

Use Data to Illustrate Key Points in Your Case Study

Even though your case study is a story, it should be based on evidence. Use as much data as possible to illustrate your point. Without the right data, your case study may appear weak and the readers may not be able to relate to your issue as much as they should. Let's see the examples from essay writing service :

‍ With data: Alcoholism is affecting more than 14 million people in the USA, which makes it the third most common mental illness there. Without data: A lot of people suffer from alcoholism in the United States.

Try to include as many credible sources as possible. You may have terms or sources that could be hard for other cultures to understand. If this is the case, you should include them in the appendix or Notes for the Instructor or Professor.

Finalizing the Draft: Checklist

After you finish drafting your case study, polish it up by answering these ‘ask yourself’ questions and think about how to end your case study:

• Check that you follow the correct case study format, also in regards to text formatting.
• Check that your work is consistent with its referencing and citation style.
• Micro-editing — check for grammar and spelling issues.
• Macro-editing — does ‘the big picture’ come across to the reader? Is there enough raw data, such as real-life examples or personal experiences? Have you made your data collection process completely transparent? Does your analysis provide a clear conclusion, allowing for further research and practice?

Problems to avoid:

• Overgeneralization – Do not go into further research that deviates from the main problem.
• Failure to Document Limitations – Just as you have to clearly state the limitations of a general research study, you must describe the specific limitations inherent in the subject of analysis.
• Failure to Extrapolate All Possible Implications – Just as you don't want to over-generalize from your case study findings, you also have to be thorough in the consideration of all possible outcomes or recommendations derived from your findings.

How to Create a Title Page and Cite a Case Study

Let's see how to create an awesome title page.

Your title page depends on the prescribed citation format. The title page should include:

• A title that attracts some attention and describes your study
• The title should have the words “case study” in it
• The title should range between 5-9 words in length
• Your name and contact information
• Your finished paper should be only 500 to 1,500 words in length.With this type of assignment, write effectively and avoid fluff

Here is a template for the APA and MLA format title page:

There are some cases when you need to cite someone else's study in your own one – therefore, you need to master how to cite a case study. A case study is like a research paper when it comes to citations. You can cite it like you cite a book, depending on what style you need.

Citation Example in MLA ‍ Hill, Linda, Tarun Khanna, and Emily A. Stecker. HCL Technologies. Boston: Harvard Business Publishing, 2008. Print.

Citation Example in APA ‍ Hill, L., Khanna, T., & Stecker, E. A. (2008). HCL Technologies. Boston: Harvard Business Publishing.

Citation Example in Chicago Hill, Linda, Tarun Khanna, and Emily A. Stecker. HCL Technologies.

Case Study Examples

To give you an idea of a professional case study example, we gathered and linked some below.

Eastman Kodak Case Study

Case Study Example: Audi Trains Mexican Autoworkers in Germany

To conclude, a case study is one of the best methods of getting an overview of what happened to a person, a group, or a situation in practice. It allows you to have an in-depth glance at the real-life problems that businesses, healthcare industry, criminal justice, etc. may face. This insight helps us look at such situations in a different light. This is because we see scenarios that we otherwise would not, without necessarily being there. If you need custom essays , try our research paper writing services .

Get Help Form Qualified Writers

Crafting a case study is not easy. You might want to write one of high quality, but you don’t have the time or expertise. If you’re having trouble with your case study, help with essay request - we'll help. EssayPro writers have read and written countless case studies and are experts in endless disciplines. Request essay writing, editing, or proofreading assistance from our custom case study writing service , and all of your worries will be gone.

Don't Know Where to Start?

Crafting a case study is not easy. You might want to write one of high quality, but you don’t have the time or expertise. Request ' write my case study ' assistance from our service.

What Is A Case Study?

How to cite a case study in apa, how to write a case study, related articles.

How to Write a Case Study

This guide explains how to write a descriptive case study. A descriptive case study describes how an organization handled a specific issue. Case studies can vary in length and the amount of details provided. They can be fictional or based on true events.

Why should you write one? Case studies can help others (e.g., students, other organizations, employees) learn about

• new concepts,
• best practices, and
• situations they might face.

Writing a case study also allows you to critically examine your organizational practices.

The following pages provide examples of different types of case study formats. As you read them, think about what stands out to you. Which format best matches your needs? You can make similar stylistic choices when you write your own case study.

ACF Case Studies of Community Economic Development This page contains links to nine case studies that describe how different organizations performed economic development activities in their communities.

National Asthma Control Program Wee Wheezers This case study describes a public health program.

CDC Epidemiologic Case Studies This page contains links to five classroom-style case studies on foodborne diseases.

ATSDR Environmental Health and Medicine This page contains links to approximately 20 classroom-style case studies focused on exposures to environmental hazards.

What are your goals ? What should your intended readers understand or learn after reading your case? Pick 1–5 realistic goals. The more goals you include, the more complex your case study might need to be.

Who is your audience? You need to write with them in mind.

What kind of background knowledge do they have? Very little, moderate, or a lot of knowledge. Be sure to explain special terms and jargon so that readers with little to moderate knowledge can understand and enjoy your case study.

What format do you need to use? Will your case study be published in a journal, online, or printed as part of a handout? Think about how word minimums or maximums will shape what you can talk about and how you talk about it. For example, you may be allowed fewer words for a case study written for a print textbook than for a webpage.

What narrative perspective will you use? A first-person perspective uses words such as “I” and” “we” to tell a story. A third-person perspective uses pronouns and names such as “they” or “CDC”. Be consistent throughout your case study.

Depending on your writing style, you might prefer to write everything that comes to your mind first, then organize and edit it later. Some of you might prefer to use headings or be more structured and methodical in your approach. Any writing style is fine, just be sure to write! Later, after you have included all the necessary information, you can go back and find more appropriate words, ensure your writing is clear, and edit your punctuation and grammar.

• Use clear writing principles, sometimes called plain language. More information can be found in the CDC’s Guide to Clear Writing [PDF – 5 MB] or on the Federal Plain Language website .
• Use active voice instead of passive voice. If you are unfamiliar with active voice, review resources such as NCEH/ATSDR’s Training on Active Voice , The National Archive’s Active Voice Tips , and USCIS’ Video on Active Voice .
• Word choice is important. If you use jargon or special terminology, define it for readers.
• CDC has developed many resources to help writers choose better words. These include the NCEH/ATSDR Environmental Health Thesaurus , CDC’s National Center for Health Marketing Plain Language Thesaurus for Health Communicators [PDF – 565 KB] , CDC’s Everyday Words for Public Health Communication [PDF – 282 KB] , and the NCEH/ATSDR’s Clear Writing Hub .

After writing a draft, the case study writer or team should have 2–3 people, unfamiliar with the draft, read it over. These people should highlight any words or sentences they find confusing. They can also write down one or two questions that they still have after reading the draft. The case study writer or team can use those notes make edits.

• Review your goals for the case study. Have you met each goal? Make any necessary edits.
• Check your sentence length. If your sentence has more than 20 words, it might be too long. Limit each sentence to one main idea.
• Use common words and phrases. Review a list of commonly misused words and phrases.
• Be sure you have been consistent with your verb tenses throughout.

Finally, the writer/team should have someone with a good eye for detail review the case study for grammar and formatting issues. You can review the CDC Style Guide [PDF – 1.36 MB]  for clarification on the use of punctuation, spelling, tables, etc.

Green BN, Johnson CD. How to write a case report for publication. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine. 2006;5(2):72-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-3467(07)60137-2

Scholz RW, Tietje O. Types of case studies. In: Embedded Case Study Methods . Thousand Oaks (CA): SAGE Publications, Inc.; 2002. P. 9-14. doi:10.4135/9781412984027

Warner C. How to Write a Case Study [online]. 2009. Available from URL: https://www.asec.purdue.edu/lct/HBCU/documents/HOWTOWRITEACASESTUDY.pdf [PDF – 14.5 KB]

Title: Organization: Author(s):

Goals: After reading this case study, readers should

Introduction Who is your organization? What is your expertise? Provide your audience with some background information, such as your expertise. This provides context to help them understand your decisions. (How much should you write? A few sentences to 1 paragraph)

What problem did you address? Who identified the problem? Provide some background on who noticed the problem and how it was reported. Were multiple organizations or people involved in identifying and addressing the problem? This will help the reader understand how and why decisions were made. (1 paragraph)

Case Details Provide more information about the community. What factors affected your decisions? Describe the community. The context, or setting, is very important to readers. What are some of the unique characteristics that affected your decisions? (1 paragraph)

How did you address the problem? Start at the beginning. Summarize what happened, in chronological order. If you know which section of the publication your case study is likely to be put in, you can specify how your actions addressed one or more of the main points of the publication/lesson.

What challenge(s) did you encounter? Address them now if you have not already.

What was the outcome? What were your notable achievements? Explain how your actions or the outcomes satisfy your learning goals for the reader. Be clear about the main point. For example, if you wanted readers to understand how your organization dealt with a major organizational change, include a few sentences that reiterate how you encountered and dealt with the organizational change. (A few sentences to 1 paragraph)

Conclusion Summarize lessons learned. Reiterate your main point(s) for the reader by explaining how your actions, or the outcomes, meet your goals for the reader.

Exit Notification / Disclaimer Policy

• The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) cannot attest to the accuracy of a non-federal website.
• Linking to a non-federal website does not constitute an endorsement by CDC or any of its employees of the sponsors or the information and products presented on the website.
• You will be subject to the destination website's privacy policy when you follow the link.
• CDC is not responsible for Section 508 compliance (accessibility) on other federal or private website.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it's official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Browse Titles

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 Jan-.

StatPearls [Internet].

Case control studies.

Steven Tenny ; Connor C. Kerndt ; Mary R. Hoffman .

Affiliations

Last Update: March 27, 2023 .

• Introduction

A case-control study is a type of observational study commonly used to look at factors associated with diseases or outcomes. [1]   The case-control study starts with a group of cases, which are the individuals who have the outcome of interest. The researcher then tries to construct a second group of individuals called the controls, who are similar to the case individuals but do not have the outcome of interest. The researcher then looks at historical factors to identify if some exposure(s) is/are found more commonly in the cases than the controls. If the exposure is found more commonly in the cases than in the controls, the researcher can hypothesize that the exposure may be linked to the outcome of interest. 

For example, a researcher may want to look at the rare cancer Kaposi's sarcoma. The researcher would find a group of individuals with Kaposi's sarcoma (the cases) and compare them to a group of patients who are similar to the cases in most ways but do not have Kaposi's sarcoma (controls). The researcher could then ask about various exposures to see if any exposure is more common in those with Kaposi's sarcoma (the cases) than those without Kaposi's sarcoma (the controls). The researcher might find that those with Kaposi's sarcoma are more likely to have HIV, and thus conclude that HIV may be a risk factor for the development of Kaposi's sarcoma.

There are many advantages to case-control studies.  First, the case-control approach allows for the study of rare diseases.   If a disease occurs very infrequently, one would have to follow a large group of people for a long period of time to accrue enough incident cases to study. Such use of resources may be impractical, so a case-control study can be useful for identifying current cases and evaluating historical associated factors.  For example, if a disease developed in 1 in 1000 people per year (0.001/year) then in ten years one would expect about 10 cases of a disease to exist in a group of 1000 people. If the disease is much rarer, say 1 in 1,000,0000 per year (0.0000001/year) this would require either having to follow 1,000,0000 people for ten years or 1000 people for 1000 years to accrue ten total cases. As it may be impractical to follow 1,000,000 for ten years or to wait 1000 years for recruitment, a case-control study allows for a more feasible approach. 

Second, the case-control study design makes it possible to look at multiple risk factors at once. In the example above about Kaposi's sarcoma, the researcher could ask both the cases and controls about exposures to HIV, asbestos, smoking, lead, sunburns, aniline dye, alcohol, herpes, human papillomavirus, or any number of possible exposures to identify those most likely associated with Kaposi's sarcoma.

Case-control studies can also be very helpful when disease outbreaks occur, and potential links and exposures need to be identified.  This study mechanism can be commonly seen in food-related disease outbreaks associated with contaminated products, or when rare diseases start to increase in frequency, as has been seen with measles in recent years.

Because of these advantages, case-control studies are commonly used as one of the first studies to build evidence of an association between exposure and an event or disease.

In a case-control study, the investigator can include unequal numbers of cases with controls such as 2:1 or 4:1 to increase the power of the study.

Disadvantages and Limitations

The most commonly cited disadvantage in case-control studies is the potential for recall bias. [2]   Recall bias in a case-control study is the increased likelihood that those with the outcome will recall and report exposures compared to those without the outcome.  In other words, even if both groups had exactly the same exposures, the participants in the cases group may report the exposure more often than the controls do.  Recall bias may lead to concluding that there are associations between exposure and disease that do not, in fact, exist. It is due to subjects' imperfect memories of past exposures.  If people with Kaposi's sarcoma are asked about exposure and history (e.g., HIV, asbestos, smoking, lead, sunburn, aniline dye, alcohol, herpes, human papillomavirus), the individuals with the disease are more likely to think harder about these exposures and recall having some of the exposures that the healthy controls.

Case-control studies, due to their typically retrospective nature, can be used to establish a correlation  between exposures and outcomes, but cannot establish causation . These studies simply attempt to find correlations between past events and the current state. 

When designing a case-control study, the researcher must find an appropriate control group. Ideally, the case group (those with the outcome) and the control group (those without the outcome) will have almost the same characteristics, such as age, gender, overall health status, and other factors. The two groups should have similar histories and live in similar environments. If, for example, our cases of Kaposi's sarcoma came from across the country but our controls were only chosen from a small community in northern latitudes where people rarely go outside or get sunburns, asking about sunburn may not be a valid exposure to investigate.  Similarly, if all of the cases of Kaposi's sarcoma were found to come from a small community outside a battery factory with high levels of lead in the environment, then controls from across the country with minimal lead exposure would not provide an appropriate control group.  The investigator must put a great deal of effort into creating a proper control group to bolster the strength of the case-control study as well as enhance their ability to find true and valid potential correlations between exposures and disease states.

Similarly, the researcher must recognize the potential for failing to identify confounding variables or exposures, introducing the possibility of confounding bias, which occurs when a variable that is not being accounted for that has a relationship with both the exposure and outcome.  This can cause us to accidentally be studying something we are not accounting for but that may be systematically different between the groups. 

The major method for analyzing results in case-control studies is the odds ratio (OR). The odds ratio is the odds of having a disease (or outcome) with the exposure versus the odds of having the disease without the exposure. The most straightforward way to calculate the odds ratio is with a 2 by 2 table divided by exposure and disease status (see below). Mathematically we can write the odds ratio as follows.

Odds ratio = [(Number exposed with disease)/(Number exposed without disease) ]/[(Number not exposed to disease)/(Number not exposed without disease) ]

This can be rewritten as:

Odds ratio = [ (Number exposed with disease) x (Number not exposed without disease) ] / [ (Number exposed without disease ) x (Number not exposed with disease) ] 

The odds ratio tells us how strongly the exposure is related to the disease state. An odds ratio of greater than one implies the disease is more likely with exposure. An odds ratio of less than one implies the disease is less likely with exposure and thus the exposure may be protective.  For example, a patient with a prior heart attack taking a daily aspirin has a decreased odds of having another heart attack (odds ratio less than one). An odds ratio of one implies there is no relation between the exposure and the disease process.

Odds ratios are often confused with Relative Risk (RR), which is a measure of the probability of the disease or outcome in the exposed vs unexposed groups.  For very rare conditions, the OR and RR may be very similar, but they are measuring different aspects of the association between outcome and exposure.  The OR is used in case-control studies because RR cannot be estimated; whereas in randomized clinical trials, a direct measurement of the development of events in the exposed and unexposed groups can be seen. RR is also used to compare risk in other prospective study designs.

• Issues of Concern

The main issues of concern with a case-control study are recall bias, its retrospective nature, the need for a careful collection of measured variables, and the selection of an appropriate control group. [3]  These are discussed above in the disadvantages section.

• Clinical Significance

A case-control study is a good tool for exploring risk factors for rare diseases or when other study types are not feasible.  Many times an investigator will hypothesize a list of possible risk factors for a disease process and will then use a case-control study to see if there are any possible associations between the risk factors and the disease process. The investigator can then use the data from the case-control study to focus on a few of the most likely causative factors and develop additional hypotheses or questions.  Then through further exploration, often using other study types (such as cohort studies or randomized clinical studies) the researcher may be able to develop further support for the evidence of the possible association between the exposure and the outcome.

• Enhancing Healthcare Team Outcomes

Case-control studies are prevalent in all fields of medicine from nursing and pharmacy to use in public health and surgical patients.  Case-control studies are important for each member of the health care team to not only understand their common occurrence in research but because each part of the health care team has parts to contribute to such studies.  One of the most important things each party provides is helping identify correct controls for the cases.  Matching the controls across a spectrum of factors outside of the elements of interest take input from nurses, pharmacists, social workers, physicians, demographers, and more.  Failure for adequate selection of controls can lead to invalid study conclusions and invalidate the entire study.

• Review Questions
• Access free multiple choice questions on this topic.
• Comment on this article.

2x2 table with calculations for the odds ratio and 95% confidence interval for the odds ratio Contributed by Steven Tenny MD, MPH, MBA

Disclosure: Steven Tenny declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.

Disclosure: Connor Kerndt declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.

Disclosure: Mary Hoffman declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.

This book is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ), which permits others to distribute the work, provided that the article is not altered or used commercially. You are not required to obtain permission to distribute this article, provided that you credit the author and journal.

• Cite this Page Tenny S, Kerndt CC, Hoffman MR. Case Control Studies. [Updated 2023 Mar 27]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 Jan-.

In this Page

Bulk download.

• Bulk download StatPearls data from FTP

Related information

• PMC PubMed Central citations
• PubMed Links to PubMed

Similar articles in PubMed

• Suicidal Ideation. [StatPearls. 2024] Suicidal Ideation. Harmer B, Lee S, Duong TVH, Saadabadi A. StatPearls. 2024 Jan
• Qualitative Study. [StatPearls. 2024] Qualitative Study. Tenny S, Brannan JM, Brannan GD. StatPearls. 2024 Jan
• Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas. [Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022] Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas. Crider K, Williams J, Qi YP, Gutman J, Yeung L, Mai C, Finkelstain J, Mehta S, Pons-Duran C, Menéndez C, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1; 2(2022). Epub 2022 Feb 1.
• Review The epidemiology of classic, African, and immunosuppressed Kaposi's sarcoma. [Epidemiol Rev. 1991] Review The epidemiology of classic, African, and immunosuppressed Kaposi's sarcoma. Wahman A, Melnick SL, Rhame FS, Potter JD. Epidemiol Rev. 1991; 13:178-99.
• Review Epidemiology of Kaposi's sarcoma. [Cancer Surv. 1991] Review Epidemiology of Kaposi's sarcoma. Beral V. Cancer Surv. 1991; 10:5-22.

Recent Activity

• Case Control Studies - StatPearls Case Control Studies - StatPearls

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers

Writing A Case Study

A Complete Case Study Writing Guide With Examples

People also read

Simple Case Study Format for Students to Follow

Understand the Types of Case Study Here

Brilliant Case Study Examples and Templates For Your Help

Many writers find themselves grappling with the challenge of crafting persuasive and engaging case studies. 

The process can be overwhelming, leaving them unsure where to begin or how to structure their study effectively. And, without a clear plan, it's tough to show the value and impact in a convincing way.

But don’t worry!

In this blog, we'll guide you through a systematic process, offering step-by-step instructions on crafting a compelling case study. 

Along the way, we'll share valuable tips and illustrative examples to enhance your understanding. So, let’s get started.

• 1. What is a Case Study? 
• 2. Types of Case Studies
• 3. How To Write a Case Study - 9 Steps
• 4. Case Study Methods
• 5. Case Study Format
• 6. Case Study Examples
• 7. Benefits and Limitations of Case Studies

What is a Case Study? 

A case study is a detailed analysis and examination of a particular subject, situation, or phenomenon. It involves comprehensive research to gain a deep understanding of the context and variables involved. 

Typically used in academic, business, and marketing settings, case studies aim to explore real-life scenarios, providing insights into challenges, solutions, and outcomes. They serve as valuable tools for learning, decision-making, and showcasing success stories.

Tough Essay Due? Hire Tough Writers!

Types of Case Studies

Case studies come in various forms, each tailored to address specific objectives and areas of interest. Here are some of the main types of case studies :

• Illustrative Case Studies: These focus on describing a particular situation or event, providing a detailed account to enhance understanding.
• Exploratory Case Studies: Aimed at investigating an issue and generating initial insights, these studies are particularly useful when exploring new or complex topics.
• Explanatory Case Studies: These delve into the cause-and-effect relationships within a given scenario, aiming to explain why certain outcomes occurred.
• Intrinsic Case Studies: Concentrating on a specific case that holds intrinsic value, these studies explore the unique qualities of the subject itself.
• Instrumental Case Studies: These are conducted to understand a broader issue and use the specific case as a means to gain insights into the larger context.
• Collective Case Studies: Involving the study of multiple cases, this type allows for comparisons and contrasts, offering a more comprehensive view of a phenomenon or problem.

How To Write a Case Study - 9 Steps

Crafting an effective case study involves a structured approach to ensure clarity, engagement, and relevance. 

Here's a step-by-step guide on how to write a compelling case study:

Step 1: Define Your Objective

Before diving into the writing process, clearly define the purpose of your case study. Identify the key questions you want to answer and the specific goals you aim to achieve. 

Whether it's to showcase a successful project, analyze a problem, or demonstrate the effectiveness of a solution, a well-defined objective sets the foundation for a focused and impactful case study.

Step 2: Conduct Thorough Research

Gather all relevant information and data related to your chosen case. This may include interviews, surveys, documentation, and statistical data. 

Ensure that your research is comprehensive, covering all aspects of the case to provide a well-rounded and accurate portrayal. 

The more thorough your research, the stronger your case study's foundation will be.

Step 3: Introduction: Set the Stage

Begin your case study with a compelling introduction that grabs the reader's attention. Clearly state the subject and the primary issue or challenge faced. 

Engage your audience by setting the stage for the narrative, creating intrigue, and highlighting the significance of the case.

Step 4: Present the Background Information

Provide context by presenting the background information of the case. Explore relevant history, industry trends, and any other factors that contribute to a deeper understanding of the situation. 

This section sets the stage for readers, allowing them to comprehend the broader context before delving into the specifics of the case.

Step 5: Outline the Challenges Faced

Identify and articulate the challenges or problems encountered in the case. Clearly define the obstacles that needed to be overcome, emphasizing their significance. 

This section sets the stakes for your audience and prepares them for the subsequent exploration of solutions.

Step 6: Detail the Solutions Implemented

Describe the strategies, actions, or solutions applied to address the challenges outlined. Be specific about the decision-making process, the rationale behind the chosen solutions, and any alternatives considered. 

This part of the case study demonstrates problem-solving skills and showcases the effectiveness of the implemented measures.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That's our Job!

Step 7: Showcase Measurable Results

Present tangible outcomes and results achieved as a direct consequence of the implemented solutions. Use data, metrics, and success stories to quantify the impact. 

Whether it's increased revenue, improved efficiency, or positive customer feedback, measurable results add credibility and validation to your case study.

Step 8: Include Engaging Visuals

Enhance the readability and visual appeal of your case study by incorporating relevant visuals such as charts, graphs, images, and infographics. 

Visual elements not only break up the text but also provide a clearer representation of data and key points, making your case study more engaging and accessible.

Step 9: Provide a Compelling Conclusion

Wrap up your case study with a strong and conclusive summary. Revisit the initial objectives, recap key findings, and emphasize the overall success or significance of the case. 

This section should leave a lasting impression on your readers, reinforcing the value of the presented information.

Case Study Methods

The methods employed in case study writing are diverse and flexible, catering to the unique characteristics of each case. Here are common methods used in case study writing:

Conducting one-on-one or group interviews with individuals involved in the case to gather firsthand information, perspectives, and insights.

• Observation

Directly observing the subject or situation to collect data on behaviors, interactions, and contextual details.

• Document Analysis

Examining existing documents, records, reports, and other written materials relevant to the case to gather information and insights.

• Surveys and Questionnaires

Distributing structured surveys or questionnaires to relevant stakeholders to collect quantitative data on specific aspects of the case.

• Participant Observation

Combining direct observation with active participation in the activities or events related to the case to gain an insider's perspective.

• Triangulation

Using multiple methods (e.g., interviews, observation, and document analysis) to cross-verify and validate the findings, enhancing the study's reliability.

• Ethnography

Immersing the researcher in the subject's environment over an extended period, focusing on understanding the cultural context and social dynamics.

Case Study Format

Effectively presenting your case study is as crucial as the content itself. Follow these formatting guidelines to ensure clarity and engagement:

• Opt for fonts that are easy to read, such as Arial, Calibri, or Times New Roman.
• Maintain a consistent font size, typically 12 points for the body text.
• Aim for double-line spacing to maintain clarity and prevent overwhelming the reader with too much text.
• Utilize bullet points to present information in a concise and easily scannable format.
• Use numbered lists when presenting a sequence of steps or a chronological order of events.
• Bold or italicize key phrases or important terms to draw attention to critical points.
• Use underline sparingly, as it can sometimes be distracting in digital formats.
• Choose the left alignment style.
• Use hierarchy to distinguish between different levels of headings, making it easy for readers to navigate.

If you're still having trouble organizing your case study, check out this blog on case study format for helpful insights.

Case Study Examples

If you want to understand how to write a case study, examples are a fantastic way to learn. That's why we've gathered a collection of intriguing case study examples for you to review before you begin writing.

Case Study Research Example

Case Study Template

Case Study Introduction Example

Amazon Case Study Example

Business Case Study Example

APA Format Case Study Example

Psychology Case Study Example

Medical Case Study Example

UX Case Study Example

Looking for more examples? Check out our blog on case study examples for your inspiration!

Benefits and Limitations of Case Studies

Case studies are a versatile and in-depth research method, providing a nuanced understanding of complex phenomena. 

However, like any research approach, case studies come with their set of benefits and limitations. Some of them are given below:

Tips for Writing an Effective Case Study

Here are some important tips for writing a good case study:

• Clearly articulate specific, measurable research questions aligned with your objectives.
• Identify whether your case study is exploratory, explanatory, intrinsic, or instrumental.
• Choose a case that aligns with your research questions, whether it involves an individual case or a group of people through multiple case studies.
• Explore the option of conducting multiple case studies to enhance the breadth and depth of your findings.
• Present a structured format with clear sections, ensuring readability and alignment with the type of research.
• Clearly define the significance of the problem or challenge addressed in your case study, tying it back to your research questions.
• Collect and include quantitative and qualitative data to support your analysis and address the identified research questions.
• Provide sufficient detail without overwhelming your audience, ensuring a comprehensive yet concise presentation.
• Emphasize how your findings can be practically applied to real-world situations, linking back to your research objectives.
• Acknowledge and transparently address any limitations in your study, ensuring a comprehensive and unbiased approach.

To sum it up, creating a good case study involves careful thinking to share valuable insights and keep your audience interested. 

Stick to basics like having clear questions and understanding your research type. Choose the right case and keep things organized and balanced.

Remember, your case study should tackle a problem, use relevant data, and show how it can be applied in real life. Be honest about any limitations, and finish with a clear call-to-action to encourage further exploration.

However, if you are having issues understanding how to write a case study, it is best to hire MyPerfectWords.com 's Professional service.  Hiring our custom essay service will ensure that you will get the best grades on your essay without any stress of a deadline. 

So be sure to check out case study writing service online and stay up to the mark with your grades. 

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the purpose of a case study.

The objective of a case study is to do intensive research on a specific matter, such as individuals or communities. It's often used for academic purposes where you want the reader to know all factors involved in your subject while also understanding the processes at play.

What are the sources of a case study?

Some common sources of a case study include:

• Archival records
• Direct observations and encounters
• Participant observation
• Facts and statistics
• Physical artifacts

What is the sample size of a case study?

A normally acceptable size of a case study is 30-50. However, the final number depends on the scope of your study and the on-ground demographic realities.

Write Essay Within 60 Seconds!

Dr. Barbara is a highly experienced writer and author who holds a Ph.D. degree in public health from an Ivy League school. She has worked in the medical field for many years, conducting extensive research on various health topics. Her writing has been featured in several top-tier publications.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That’s our Job!

Keep reading

Top 40 Most Popular Case Studies of 2021

Two cases about Hertz claimed top spots in 2021's Top 40 Most Popular Case Studies

Two cases on the uses of debt and equity at Hertz claimed top spots in the CRDT’s (Case Research and Development Team) 2021 top 40 review of cases.

Hertz (A) took the top spot. The case details the financial structure of the rental car company through the end of 2019. Hertz (B), which ranked third in CRDT’s list, describes the company’s struggles during the early part of the COVID pandemic and its eventual need to enter Chapter 11 bankruptcy. 

The success of the Hertz cases was unprecedented for the top 40 list. Usually, cases take a number of years to gain popularity, but the Hertz cases claimed top spots in their first year of release. Hertz (A) also became the first ‘cooked’ case to top the annual review, as all of the other winners had been web-based ‘raw’ cases.

Besides introducing students to the complicated financing required to maintain an enormous fleet of cars, the Hertz cases also expanded the diversity of case protagonists. Kathyrn Marinello was the CEO of Hertz during this period and the CFO, Jamere Jackson is black.

Sandwiched between the two Hertz cases, Coffee 2016, a perennial best seller, finished second. “Glory, Glory, Man United!” a case about an English football team’s IPO made a surprise move to number four.  Cases on search fund boards, the future of malls,  Norway’s Sovereign Wealth fund, Prodigy Finance, the Mayo Clinic, and Cadbury rounded out the top ten.

Other year-end data for 2021 showed:

• Online “raw” case usage remained steady as compared to 2020 with over 35K users from 170 countries and all 50 U.S. states interacting with 196 cases.
• Fifty four percent of raw case users came from outside the U.S..
• The Yale School of Management (SOM) case study directory pages received over 160K page views from 177 countries with approximately a third originating in India followed by the U.S. and the Philippines.
• Twenty-six of the cases in the list are raw cases.
• A third of the cases feature a woman protagonist.
• Orders for Yale SOM case studies increased by almost 50% compared to 2020.
• The top 40 cases were supervised by 19 different Yale SOM faculty members, several supervising multiple cases.

CRDT compiled the Top 40 list by combining data from its case store, Google Analytics, and other measures of interest and adoption.

All of this year’s Top 40 cases are available for purchase from the Yale Management Media store .

And the Top 40 cases studies of 2021 are:

1.   Hertz Global Holdings (A): Uses of Debt and Equity

2.   Coffee 2016

3.   Hertz Global Holdings (B): Uses of Debt and Equity 2020

4.   Glory, Glory Man United!

5.   Search Fund Company Boards: How CEOs Can Build Boards to Help Them Thrive

6.   The Future of Malls: Was Decline Inevitable?

7.   Strategy for Norway's Pension Fund Global

8.   Prodigy Finance

9.   Design at Mayo

10. Cadbury

11. City Hospital Emergency Room

13. Volkswagen

14. Marina Bay Sands

15. Shake Shack IPO

16. Mastercard

17. Netflix

18. Ant Financial

19. AXA: Creating the New CR Metrics

20. IBM Corporate Service Corps

21. Business Leadership in South Africa's 1994 Reforms

22. Alternative Meat Industry

23. Children's Premier

24. Khalil Tawil and Umi (A)

25. Palm Oil 2016

26. Teach For All: Designing a Global Network

27. What's Next? Search Fund Entrepreneurs Reflect on Life After Exit

28. Searching for a Search Fund Structure: A Student Takes a Tour of Various Options

30. Project Sammaan

31. Commonfund ESG

32. Polaroid

33. Connecticut Green Bank 2018: After the Raid

34. FieldFresh Foods

35. The Alibaba Group

36. 360 State Street: Real Options

37. Herman Miller

38. AgBiome

39. Nathan Cummings Foundation

40. Toyota 2010

Do Your Students Know How to Analyze a Case—Really?

Explore more.

• Case Teaching
• Student Engagement

J ust as actors, athletes, and musicians spend thousands of hours practicing their craft, business students benefit from practicing their critical-thinking and decision-making skills. Students, however, often have limited exposure to real-world problem-solving scenarios; they need more opportunities to practice tackling tough business problems and deciding on—and executing—the best solutions.

To ensure students have ample opportunity to develop these critical-thinking and decision-making skills, we believe business faculty should shift from teaching mostly principles and ideas to mostly applications and practices. And in doing so, they should emphasize the case method, which simulates real-world management challenges and opportunities for students.

To help educators facilitate this shift and help students get the most out of case-based learning, we have developed a framework for analyzing cases. We call it PACADI (Problem, Alternatives, Criteria, Analysis, Decision, Implementation); it can improve learning outcomes by helping students better solve and analyze business problems, make decisions, and develop and implement strategy. Here, we’ll explain why we developed this framework, how it works, and what makes it an effective learning tool.

The Case for Cases: Helping Students Think Critically

Business students must develop critical-thinking and analytical skills, which are essential to their ability to make good decisions in functional areas such as marketing, finance, operations, and information technology, as well as to understand the relationships among these functions. For example, the decisions a marketing manager must make include strategic planning (segments, products, and channels); execution (digital messaging, media, branding, budgets, and pricing); and operations (integrated communications and technologies), as well as how to implement decisions across functional areas.

Faculty can use many types of cases to help students develop these skills. These include the prototypical “paper cases”; live cases , which feature guest lecturers such as entrepreneurs or corporate leaders and on-site visits; and multimedia cases , which immerse students into real situations. Most cases feature an explicit or implicit decision that a protagonist—whether it is an individual, a group, or an organization—must make.

For students new to learning by the case method—and even for those with case experience—some common issues can emerge; these issues can sometimes be a barrier for educators looking to ensure the best possible outcomes in their case classrooms. Unsure of how to dig into case analysis on their own, students may turn to the internet or rely on former students for “answers” to assigned cases. Or, when assigned to provide answers to assignment questions in teams, students might take a divide-and-conquer approach but not take the time to regroup and provide answers that are consistent with one other.

To help address these issues, which we commonly experienced in our classes, we wanted to provide our students with a more structured approach for how they analyze cases—and to really think about making decisions from the protagonists’ point of view. We developed the PACADI framework to address this need.

PACADI: A Six-Step Decision-Making Approach

The PACADI framework is a six-step decision-making approach that can be used in lieu of traditional end-of-case questions. It offers a structured, integrated, and iterative process that requires students to analyze case information, apply business concepts to derive valuable insights, and develop recommendations based on these insights.

Prior to beginning a PACADI assessment, which we’ll outline here, students should first prepare a two-paragraph summary—a situation analysis—that highlights the key case facts. Then, we task students with providing a five-page PACADI case analysis (excluding appendices) based on the following six steps.

Step 1: Problem definition. What is the major challenge, problem, opportunity, or decision that has to be made? If there is more than one problem, choose the most important one. Often when solving the key problem, other issues will surface and be addressed. The problem statement may be framed as a question; for example, How can brand X improve market share among millennials in Canada? Usually the problem statement has to be re-written several times during the analysis of a case as students peel back the layers of symptoms or causation.

Step 2: Alternatives. Identify in detail the strategic alternatives to address the problem; three to five options generally work best. Alternatives should be mutually exclusive, realistic, creative, and feasible given the constraints of the situation. Doing nothing or delaying the decision to a later date are not considered acceptable alternatives.

Step 3: Criteria. What are the key decision criteria that will guide decision-making? In a marketing course, for example, these may include relevant marketing criteria such as segmentation, positioning, advertising and sales, distribution, and pricing. Financial criteria useful in evaluating the alternatives should be included—for example, income statement variables, customer lifetime value, payback, etc. Students must discuss their rationale for selecting the decision criteria and the weights and importance for each factor.

Step 4: Analysis. Provide an in-depth analysis of each alternative based on the criteria chosen in step three. Decision tables using criteria as columns and alternatives as rows can be helpful. The pros and cons of the various choices as well as the short- and long-term implications of each may be evaluated. Best, worst, and most likely scenarios can also be insightful.

Step 5: Decision. Students propose their solution to the problem. This decision is justified based on an in-depth analysis. Explain why the recommendation made is the best fit for the criteria.

Step 6: Implementation plan. Sound business decisions may fail due to poor execution. To enhance the likeliness of a successful project outcome, students describe the key steps (activities) to implement the recommendation, timetable, projected costs, expected competitive reaction, success metrics, and risks in the plan.

“Students note that using the PACADI framework yields ‘aha moments’—they learned something surprising in the case that led them to think differently about the problem and their proposed solution.”

PACADI’s Benefits: Meaningfully and Thoughtfully Applying Business Concepts

The PACADI framework covers all of the major elements of business decision-making, including implementation, which is often overlooked. By stepping through the whole framework, students apply relevant business concepts and solve management problems via a systematic, comprehensive approach; they’re far less likely to surface piecemeal responses.

As students explore each part of the framework, they may realize that they need to make changes to a previous step. For instance, when working on implementation, students may realize that the alternative they selected cannot be executed or will not be profitable, and thus need to rethink their decision. Or, they may discover that the criteria need to be revised since the list of decision factors they identified is incomplete (for example, the factors may explain key marketing concerns but fail to address relevant financial considerations) or is unrealistic (for example, they suggest a 25 percent increase in revenues without proposing an increased promotional budget).

In addition, the PACADI framework can be used alongside quantitative assignments, in-class exercises, and business and management simulations. The structured, multi-step decision framework encourages careful and sequential analysis to solve business problems. Incorporating PACADI as an overarching decision-making method across different projects will ultimately help students achieve desired learning outcomes. As a practical “beyond-the-classroom” tool, the PACADI framework is not a contrived course assignment; it reflects the decision-making approach that managers, executives, and entrepreneurs exercise daily. Case analysis introduces students to the real-world process of making business decisions quickly and correctly, often with limited information. This framework supplies an organized and disciplined process that students can readily defend in writing and in class discussions.

PACADI in Action: An Example

Here’s an example of how students used the PACADI framework for a recent case analysis on CVS, a large North American drugstore chain.

The CVS Prescription for Customer Value*

PACADI Stage

Summary Response

How should CVS Health evolve from the “drugstore of your neighborhood” to the “drugstore of your future”?

Alternatives

A1. Kaizen (continuous improvement)

A2. Product development

A3. Market development

A4. Personalization (micro-targeting)

Criteria (include weights)

C1. Customer value: service, quality, image, and price (40%)

C2. Customer obsession (20%)

C3. Growth through related businesses (20%)

C4. Customer retention and customer lifetime value (20%)

Each alternative was analyzed by each criterion using a Customer Value Assessment Tool

Alternative 4 (A4): Personalization was selected. This is operationalized via: segmentation—move toward segment-of-1 marketing; geodemographics and lifestyle emphasis; predictive data analysis; relationship marketing; people, principles, and supply chain management; and exceptional customer service.

Implementation

Partner with leading medical school

Curbside pick-up

Pet pharmacy

E-newsletter for customers and employees

Employee incentive program

CVS beauty days

Expand to Latin America and Caribbean

Healthier/happier corner

Holiday toy drives/community outreach

*Source: A. Weinstein, Y. Rodriguez, K. Sims, R. Vergara, “The CVS Prescription for Superior Customer Value—A Case Study,” Back to the Future: Revisiting the Foundations of Marketing from Society for Marketing Advances, West Palm Beach, FL (November 2, 2018).

Results of Using the PACADI Framework

When faculty members at our respective institutions at Nova Southeastern University (NSU) and the University of North Carolina Wilmington have used the PACADI framework, our classes have been more structured and engaging. Students vigorously debate each element of their decision and note that this framework yields an “aha moment”—they learned something surprising in the case that led them to think differently about the problem and their proposed solution.

These lively discussions enhance individual and collective learning. As one external metric of this improvement, we have observed a 2.5 percent increase in student case grade performance at NSU since this framework was introduced.

Tips to Get Started

The PACADI approach works well in in-person, online, and hybrid courses. This is particularly important as more universities have moved to remote learning options. Because students have varied educational and cultural backgrounds, work experience, and familiarity with case analysis, we recommend that faculty members have students work on their first case using this new framework in small teams (two or three students). Additional analyses should then be solo efforts.

To use PACADI effectively in your classroom, we suggest the following:

Advise your students that your course will stress critical thinking and decision-making skills, not just course concepts and theory.

Use a varied mix of case studies. As marketing professors, we often address consumer and business markets; goods, services, and digital commerce; domestic and global business; and small and large companies in a single MBA course.

As a starting point, provide a short explanation (about 20 to 30 minutes) of the PACADI framework with a focus on the conceptual elements. You can deliver this face to face or through videoconferencing.

Give students an opportunity to practice the case analysis methodology via an ungraded sample case study. Designate groups of five to seven students to discuss the case and the six steps in breakout sessions (in class or via Zoom).

Ensure case analyses are weighted heavily as a grading component. We suggest 30–50 percent of the overall course grade.

Once cases are graded, debrief with the class on what they did right and areas needing improvement (30- to 40-minute in-person or Zoom session).

Encourage faculty teams that teach common courses to build appropriate instructional materials, grading rubrics, videos, sample cases, and teaching notes.

When selecting case studies, we have found that the best ones for PACADI analyses are about 15 pages long and revolve around a focal management decision. This length provides adequate depth yet is not protracted. Some of our tested and favorite marketing cases include Brand W , Hubspot , Kraft Foods Canada , TRSB(A) , and Whiskey & Cheddar .

Art Weinstein , Ph.D., is a professor of marketing at Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, Florida. He has published more than 80 scholarly articles and papers and eight books on customer-focused marketing strategy. His latest book is Superior Customer Value—Finding and Keeping Customers in the Now Economy . Dr. Weinstein has consulted for many leading technology and service companies.

Herbert V. Brotspies , D.B.A., is an adjunct professor of marketing at Nova Southeastern University. He has over 30 years’ experience as a vice president in marketing, strategic planning, and acquisitions for Fortune 50 consumer products companies working in the United States and internationally. His research interests include return on marketing investment, consumer behavior, business-to-business strategy, and strategic planning.

John T. Gironda , Ph.D., is an assistant professor of marketing at the University of North Carolina Wilmington. His research has been published in Industrial Marketing Management, Psychology & Marketing , and Journal of Marketing Management . He has also presented at major marketing conferences including the American Marketing Association, Academy of Marketing Science, and Society for Marketing Advances.

Related Articles

We use cookies to understand how you use our site and to improve your experience, including personalizing content. Learn More . By continuing to use our site, you accept our use of cookies and revised Privacy Policy .

National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment

• Mission & Vision
• National Advisory Panel
• NILOA Staff
• Partner & Collaborating Organizations
• Occasional Papers
• Assessment in Practice
• Case Studies
• Assignment Library
• Featured Assignments
• Assignment Charrette
• Equity Responses
• Transparency Framework
• Excellence in Assessment
• Evidence-Based Storytelling
• Featured Websites Archive
• Curriculum Mapping
• Learning Recognition Collaborative
• Degree Qualifications Profile
• Assessment Resources
• Newsletters
• NILOA Surveys Archive
• Resources for Newcomers
• LARC Assessment Modules
• Questions at Hand
• Audience Type

Case studies provide short, instructive examples of good assessment practice, along with lessons learned that are widely applicable.

Alverno College is a case study site due to innovative and long-standing assessment practices as well as a commitment to student-centered teaching. Although Alverno is well established in its assessment practices, other institutions can learn from and adapt many aspects of Alverno’s assessment model to improve and sustain their own meaningful assessment work.

American Public University System (APUS) is a case study site for its unique mission and significant headway made in working with the Degree Qualifications Profile (DQP), leading to institution-wide implementation and adoption, the thoughtful process for working through DQP use, the development of signature assignments, and the incorporation of the DQP framework into the university system’s program review process.

Augustana College is a case study site due to its approach to faculty involvement and a long-standing commitment to assessing and communicating student learning. Augustana’s focus on teaching and learning, the dynamic role of the Assessment Review Committee, and communication strategies has allowed them to make several improvements on campus based on their assessment activities.

Capella University is a case study site for its systematic, embedded student learning outcomes assessment process; its administrative support and vision of what assessment can do for individual learners; its transparency efforts such as Capella Results, which publicizes assessment results; and its use of assessment results to enhance learner success.

Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) was selected as a case study for the approach to student learning outcomes assessment that reflects the institution’s commitment to interdisciplinarity and innovative teaching and learning. Three elements have been instrumental in CMU’s advances in program-level student learning outcomes assessment: 1) an institutionalized research-oriented and data-informed university decision-making process driven by deans and departments; 2) an organizational culture with established processes promoting continuous improvement; and 3) the elevation of a cross-campus faculty resource–the Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence–as the hub of assessment support. The original case study took place in 2012 with a follow-up study published in 2021 .

Colorado State University publicized its commitment to ensuring transparency and accountability to students, parents, and the public; expanded its continuous improvement system for managing information sharing to serve the decision-making and reporting needs of various audiences through the CSU Plan for Researching Improvement and Supporting Mission, or PRISM; uses a peer review system for feedback, and serves as a model for bridging the work of academic affairs and student affairs together through student learning outcomes assessment.

Daemen College is a case study site due to their involvement in the Council of Independent Colleges (CIC) consortium on the Degree Qualifications Profile (DQP). As part of this project, Daemen College engaged with the DQP to further their preexisting curricular mapping projects, as well as advance their newly instituted assessment program and assignment design initiative, including a co-curricular inventory.

Georgia State University (GSU) and Georgia Perimeter College (GPC) were selected as case study sites for its work in testing the Degree Qualifications Profile (DQP) to facilitate transfer. The University of Georgia System project was a partnership between GSU and GPC to explore the application of the DQP to improve the success of transfer students in biology, psychology, and criminal justice programs that involve high numbers of transfer students between the two institutions.

Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) was invited to write a case study because of its strong and rich history of using numerous forms of applied and experiential learning to promote student engagement along with its ongoing Comprehensive Learner Record (CLR) work.

Juniata College was identified as a case study site for the faculty-led Center for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL Center) that champions and supports evidence-based teaching; an administration-supported accountability website that provides data and information about outcomes to multiple audiences; and the use of evidence of student learning to make improvements at the institution and individual course levels.

Kansas City Kansas Community College (KCKCC) is a case study site due to its creation of an alternative system for documenting student achievement of Degree Qualifications Profile (DQP) proficiencies. Based on an interactive curriculum mapping database where faculty enter information about individual student performance on each learning outcome and competency in their courses, reports are generated for students and programs to review and direct future action.

LaGuardia Community College is a case study site due to its reputation as a leader in learning outcomes assessment, particularly through the use of electronic portfolios (ePortfolios), commitment to assessment, collaboration across units at the college, and the institution’s robust program review system which includes assessment.

McKendree University is a case study site for its crosswalk of various learning frameworks (such as the Degree Qualifications Profile, LEAP Essential Learning Outcomes, National Collegiate Athletic Association’s (NCAA) Division II Life and Balance key attributes) to McKendree’s student learning outcomes, as well as the deliberate process of gaining campus awareness and support through their committee structure and learning outcome timeline. The original case study took place in 2016 with a follow-up study published in 2020 .

National Louis University   is a Degree Qualifications Profile (DQP) case study institution due to the intentional use of the DQP in the design of its Pathways Program including competency development, curricular focus, and assessment alignment. NLU’s use of the DQP provides an example for other institutions interested in using the DQP to develop new programs as well as curricular pathways that include a focus upon differentiated levels of learning.

North Carolina A&T State University is a case study site due to the commitment to improving the institution by developing a culture of inquiry through administrative leadership that encourages discussions and collaboration around student learning outcomes assessment activities; the use of professional development opportunities to help foster the involvement and commitment of faculty members; and the systematic and intentional use of student feedback.

Palo Alto College was selected as a NILOA case study based on its successful efforts in adapting NILOA’s assignment design toolkit to engage faculty, staff and students in assessment. Offering intimate workshops frequently throughout the academic calendar year has created a ground swell of faculty reinvesting themselves in the curriculum.

Point Loma Nazarene University is a case study site for its involvement of faculty and staff across a range of academic fields to move beyond conversations about outcomes and curriculum alignment to significant assessment activity that is comparable across programs, as well as their efforts in transparency of process and practice.

St. Olaf College is a case study institution due to the framing of assessment as inquiry in support of student learning that is meaningful, manageable, and mission-driven; the utilization-focus/backward-design approach employed in assessment; the integration of student learning outcomes assessment processes into faculty governance structures; along with the collaborative involvement of multiple stakeholders and diverse ways in which evidence of student learning is utilized throughout the institution. The original case took place in 2012 and the update occurred in 2020 .

Texas A&M International University (TAMIU) is a case study site for its commitment to choosing assessment measures and tools appropriate for its students; its long history with and innovative approach to assessment; and the influential role of professional development at the institution to help prepare “Assessment Champions and expand the number of pockets of excellence in terms of assessment practices throughout the campus.

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s case study provides insight into how the Department of African American Studies at UIUC utilizes assessment in course design, being mindful of aligning diversity and inclusion outcomes within the course and program goals, and ensuring students attain these Case Study outcomes in both in-person and online courses utilizing equitable assessments and student involvement in the assessment process

Utah State University is a case study site for the faculty-led involvement in the state of Utah Tuning projects; integration of the Degree Qualifications Profile (DQP) with various programs and colleges on campus; and bridging the work of national initiatives such as Utah’s status as a LEAP state, participation in AAC&U’s Quality Collaboratives project, involvement with the Multi-State Collaborative and WICHE Passports Initiative, general education revision; and its integration of High-Impact Practices to make connections across the entire institution to better serve students.

Washington State University (WSU) is a case study site because of its promising approach to student learning outcomes assessment in the often-challenging context of a large, highly decentralized research university, characterized by a deliberately incremental and iterative process, moving the institution step-by-step toward habits, practices, and policies that support ongoing educational improvement.

Privacy Overview

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 22 April 2024

Developing countries can adapt to climate change effectively using nature-based solutions

• Sergio Villamayor-Tomas   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5170-1718 1 , 2 , 3 ,
• Alexander Bisaro 4 ,
• Kevin Moull   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5776-4314 5 ,
• Amaia Albizua   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8381-5288 6 , 7 ,
• Isabel Mank 5 ,
• Jochen Hinkel   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7590-992X 4 ,
• Gerald Leppert   ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0008-8604-2127 5 &
• Martin Noltze 5  

Communications Earth & Environment volume  5 , Article number:  214 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Climate-change adaptation
• Environmental studies
• Sustainability

Evidence on the effectiveness of climate change adaptation interventions in low- and middle-income countries has been rapidly growing in recent years, particularly in the agricultural and coastal sectors. Here we address the question of whether results are consistent across intervention types, and risk reduction versus development-related outcomes using a systematic review of 363 empirical observations published in the scientific literature. Generally, we found more evidence of risk reduction outcomes in the coastal sector than in the agricultural sector, and more evidence of development-related outcomes in the agricultural sector. Further, results indicate that nature-based solutions have the strongest positive effects for both the coastal and agricultural sectors. Social/behavioural interventions in the coastal sector show negative effects on development-related outcomes that will need to be further tested. Taken together, our results highlight the opportunity for development and climate adaptation practitioners to promote adaptation interventions with co-benefits beyond risk reduction, particularly in the case of nature-based solutions.

Similar content being viewed by others

Empowering citizen-led adaptation to systemic climate change risks

An assessment of community-based adaptation initiatives in the Pacific Islands

A global assessment of actors and their roles in climate change adaptation

Introduction.

Sustainable Development Goals connect policies addressing climate change adaptation with complementary benefits for poverty reduction, economic stability and or public health, and highlight the need of interventions that cut across those priorities, particularly in in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) 1 , 2 . Support for the right interventions, however, has so far been hindered by a typically fragmented understanding of their effectiveness among other factors. To address this gap, our study systematically reviews the evidence (i.e., quantitative studies that are accessible online) on the effectiveness of climate change adaptation interventions in LMICs in light of different outcomes.

Evidence gap maps (EGMs) and systematic reviews can inform policy makers and practitioners by synthesizing evidence 3 . There is increasing global evidence on the effectiveness of adaptation interventions in LMICs (including small island developing states, or SIDS), particularly in the agricultural and coastal sectors 4 , 5 , 6 . Evidence in the agricultural sector includes case studies, experiments, quasi-experiments, and reviews focusing on interventions that target farmer behaviour, agricultural productivity, and livelihood resilience 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 . In the coastal sector, the evidence-base includes case studies and experiments focusing on interventions such as NbS to prevent economic damages or reduce livelihood vulnerability, among others 12 , 13 . Increasingly common among all these studies is the recognition of interactions between climate change interventions and risk reduction on the one hand and development priorities on the other 14 , 15 , 16 .

Despite the growing evidence, an integrative synthesis of adaptation effectiveness does not exist, and information remains scattered across studies and types of interventions and outcomes. Existing syntheses have focused on the state-of-the-art 5 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , metrics 21 , planning 22 , 23 , financing 24 , responses 17 , 25 , 26 , or specific types of interventions and/or outcomes 27 . Also, syntheses have not tended to distinguish between industrialized and LMICs or sectors and/or focused only on effective interventions 28 .

Major questions to be addressed concern the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, sustainability and policy coherence of adaptation interventions, particularly in developing country contexts 5 , 29 . This paper aims to address some of these gaps through the following research question: to what extent different types of climate change adaptation interventions in the agricultural and coastal sectors are effective in achieving risk-reduction and development outcomes in LMICs?

In addressing the above question our study contributes to two scholarly debates. First, we contribute to the debate of whether it is more effective that interventions target climate protection (here hazards or exposure), or sustainable development more largely (here social vulnerability and adaptive capacity) 5 . Second, we contribute to the debate around the effectiveness of different types of interventions, including the distinction between hard (technological and infrastructure-based) versus soft (behavioural or institutional) interventions 30 and the growing interest in Nature-based Solutions (NbS) due to their potential cost-effectiveness and multiple benefits across contexts 31 .

Based on a systematic review of 363 empirical observations published in the scientific literature, we find that adaptation interventions can be effective with regard to both risk reduction and development-related outcomes. That said, we find more evidence of risk reduction outcomes in the coastal sector and of development-related outcomes in the agricultural sector. NbS is the only intervention that has positive effects across all outcome categories in both sectors. Evidence is most clear about the contribution of NbS to reducing immediate risks and impacts from climate change in the coastal sector, and promoting economic benefits in the agricultural sector. In the agricultural sector, evidence is also robust about the positive effects of informational/educational and infrastructural interventions and points to the need to explore more systematically their interactions. Also importantly, the study also reveals that interventions can not only fail to achieve expected effects but also have negative effects. This is particularly the case of social/behavioural interventions in the coastal sector when assessed against development-related outcomes.

Distribution of studies across sectors, geographies, intervention types and outcome categories

The number of studies varied substantially between the two sectors. The agricultural sector had four times the number of studies (84 studies with 266 observations) compared to the coastal sector (19 studies with 97 observations). However, the number of observations (evidence linking an intervention with an outcome) per study was much higher in the coastal sector compared to the agricultural sector (5.1 versus 3.2 observations per study on average, respectively).

In the coastal sector, most authors referred to a specific threat (e.g., storms, see level rise) and did not frame their study as related to development but still contained in formation about development-like outcomes. Alternatively, most of the agricultural sector studies both referred to a specific threat (e.g., droughts, floods) and to development. The studies were geographically dispersed (see Fig.  1 ). The majority of studies were located in China (18 studies), followed by multi-country studies (17), India (13), Pakistan (6), Bangladesh, Ethiopia and Kenya (each 4). From a sectoral perspective, studies were regionally concentrated: 32% of the studies in the coastal sector were conducted in South Asia, and 11 to 16% each in East Asia and the Pacific, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Latin-America and the Caribbean. In the agricultural sector, studies in South Asia, East Asia and the Pacific and sub-Saharan Africa were much more prominent (each 24 to 27%) compared to those based in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Sources: Country layer obtained from Natural Earth—Free vector and raster map data at 1:10 m, 1:50 m, and 1:110 m scales (naturalearthdata.com). Studies grouped by region based on WDI - The World by Income and Region (worldbank.org). Map elaborated with QGIS 3.4.2.

The distribution of intervention types differed by sector and outcome categories (Table  1 ). Most of the observations (and studies) in the coastal sector were NbS (38 observations, 7 studies) and social/behavioural interventions (30, 4 studies). The studies in the agricultural sector were more evenly distributed and covered all the intervention types. This was expected and was partially a result of the larger number of studies in the agricultural (84) compared to the coastal sector (19).

Effectiveness of adaptation interventions by sectors

Overall, there were considerably more positive than negative effects reported across all interventions, outcomes, and sectors. However, positive effects were more frequent in the agricultural sector as compared to the coastal sector, and effects also varied by intervention type (Fig.  2 ). Figure  2 presents the effect size and direction (positive versus negative) of the seven different adaptation interventions by the two sectors.

- - - = large significative negative (−3), - - = small/ medium sig. neg. (−2), - = very small sig. neg./ negligible (−1), 0 = neutral/ not sig. (0), + = very small sig. positive/ negligible (1), + + = small/ medium sig. pos. (2), + + + = large sig. pos. (3). a results of reviewed studies in the agricultural sector. b results of reviewed studies in the coastal sector.

In the coastal sector (Fig.  2a ), NbS were noticeably associated with positive effects (29 positive against 9 neutral/negative observations). Social/behavioural interventions were more associated with neutral or negative effects (17 neutral/negative against 13 positive observations). However, most of the negative/neutral effects came from one single study on the effects of relocation of the population away from coastal areas and small islands 32 . Technological interventions were also mostly associated with negative effects (3 out of 4 observations). However, this was only reported by one single study.

In the agricultural sector (Fig.  2b ), most of the interventions showed positive effects (69% of all observations), although there were also neutral (~19%) and negative effects (~12%). Technological and informational interventions showed mostly positive effects (~75% of all observations in each group of interventions). Alternatively, financial and social/behavioural interventions showed a fair number of negative effects (representing 19% and 22% of all observations within each group, respectively).

Strength of effects by intervention type and outcome category

Table  2 displays the strength of effects based (means) for each pair of intervention type and outcome category, for the two sectors. As shown, we found substantial evidence of effects on both the risk reduction-related (climate hazard and exposure) and development-related (social/economic vulnerability and enabling environment) outcomes in both sectors. That said, evidence is more evenly distributed in the coastal than in the agricultural sector, where most of the evidence informs about development related outcomes (only 23% informs about risk reduction).

In the coastal sector, evidence suggests that interventions at large tend to be more positive with regard to risk-reduction than with development-related outcomes, but this varies across intervention types. Discounting missing data (i.e., variables for which studies did not have information), there were positive mean effects across at least two of the outcomes for NbS, built infrastructure, informational, and institutional interventions (Table  2 ). Mean effects were particularly high for institutional (2.0 mean positive effect) and built infrastructure (1.5) interventions, although the number of observations for these interventions was low.

NbS were more positive in reducing the risk of climate-related hazard and exposure (1.2 mean positive effect), than in decreasing social or economic vulnerability (0.8) or contributing to the enabling environment (0.7). Forest cover, for example, has been shown to protect property and human lives across coastal districts in West Bengal 33 .

Technological financial, and social/behavioural interventions showed negative mean effects for development-related outcomes in the coastal sector (Table  2 ). Technological interventions showed negative mean effects when they targeted social or economic vulnerability (−2.0 negative mean effect) and the enabling environment (−0.5). Financial interventions showed negative mean effects when they targeted the enabling environment (−0.5). Social/behavioural interventions showed negative mean effects when targeting social or economic vulnerability (−0.7) but positive mean effects when reducing the risk of climate hazard and exposure (0.6).

Social or economic vulnerability concentrated most of the negative effects. Most of these came from a single study 32 . The study explores the impact of the relocation of people from flood-prone coastal areas and islands on livelihoods using survey data from 130 households in Bangladesh. It finds that relocation has negative effects on living conditions as well as negative effects on risk reduction including food security or access to drinking-water. Conversely, the effects on risk reduction were mostly positive. The evidence on these effects came from multiple studies and a diversity of interventions, including migration, livelihood transformation, and participation in community development. Evidence from 1003 individuals across Nigeria has shown that participation in community development significantly reduces the risk of flood impacts to the household 34 .

In the agricultural sector, all intervention types with the exception of Technological interventions (due to missing data) had positive mean effects across all outcome categories, although in varying degrees (Table  2 ). Informational interventions showed considerable positive mean effects across all outcomes. As mentioned above, development-related outcomes (i.e., social or economic vulnerability) were most frequently studied. Indigenous knowledge, for example, has been found to have significant positive effects on the accuracy of accounts of past droughts among farmers in Eastern Africa 35 .

Built infrastructure and NbS also showed relatively high positive mean effects when targeting decreased social or economic vulnerability. Research in China has shown, for example, that households investing in irrigation infrastructure can obtain higher yields than otherwise in the advent of droughts 36 ; and global meta-analyses have confirmed that intercropping improves agricultural yield stability 9 .

Social/behavioural and financial interventions that targeted social or economic vulnerability showed the lowest mean effects among all interventions in the agricultural sector. Evidence from 700 livestock farmers from all four major provinces of Pakistan, for example, has shown that those resorting to migration (i.e., in search of water and fodder) as a climate change adaptation strategy tend to have lower milk production and income compared to those who did not migrate 37 . Similarly, data from 266 municipalities in the state of Bahia, Brazil, has shown that access to markets and credits can lead to significant decreases in agricultural and livestock production 38 .

Contextual conditions

Importantly enough, interventions do not occur in a vacuum; ideally, their effects need to be “controlled for” a variety of other influential aspects. A considerable amount of the studies reviewed consisted of multivariate regression analysis and highlighted some of those other influential aspects (i.e., covariates). In the coastal sector, the effectiveness of “Nature based” solutions such as mangroves to protect population from floods can hold while controlling for population density, elevation, distance from rivers or warning measures 39 . In the agricultural sector the effectiveness of “Informational/educational” interventions like extension services in promoting resilience against droughts and floods can hold regardless farmers’ wealth, education, marital status, institutional participation, size of cultivated land, number of farm plots, technological improvements, access to information or savings 40 . Further research shall delve deeper and more systematically into the study of covariates.

Effectiveness of combinations of interventions

We assessed the contribution of combinations of adaptation interventions on their effectiveness. Independent of the sector, 61% of the reviewed studies applied a single intervention. Specifically, in the coastal sector single interventions were most common (74% of the studies), while only 7% of the studies tested three interventions (Fig.  3 ). Given the small sample size for the coastal sector ( N  = 19 studies), the evidence on the effect of combined interventions needs to be taken with caution. Conversely, in the agricultural sector, every third study combined three or more interventions. When three or more interventions were combined, the proportion of significant positive effects was only slightly higher compared to single or double interventions (Fig.  3 ).

positive (blue colour), neutral (yellow colour) and negative (red colour) effects across cases with 1, 2 and 3 or more simultaneous interventions.

At large, our data show that adaptation interventions can be effective with regard to both risk reduction and development-related outcomes. That said, we found more evidence of risk reduction outcomes in the coastal sector than in the agricultural sector, and vice-versa. Also, in the coastal sector, the evidence points to potential trade-offs between risk reduction and development-related outcomes for some intervention types that will need to be further tested. More robust is the evidence about the positive effects of interventions across outcomes in the agricultural sector, illustrating the fine line existing between climate risk-reduction and development in this sector 41 , 42 , 43 .

NbS showed positive effects across all outcome categories in both sectors. This is consistent with current literature arguing that NbS produce multiple co-benefits, i.e., improve economic, social and environmental outcomes, while also contributing substantially to the reduction of climate-related risks 5 , 44 . Previous systematic reviews have shown that nearly two thirds of the NbS studied reduced negative climate impacts 45 . Yet, 80% of the evidence was derived from developed countries in the Global North. Our findings broaden the evidence base on NbS, specifically with regard to their effectiveness in LMICs. Previous research has also identified a lack of evidence on the effects of NbS on socio-economic and developmental outcomes 31 , 45 . Here, we were able to provide some of that evidence, in particular on the positive effects of crop diversification, water conservation and coastal habitat restoration on crop yields, food security and poverty reduction, respectively 9 , 33 . These findings also align with the claims that NbS and associated agro-ecological practices can enhance land ecosystem services and ensure sustainable land use systems in the agricultural sector 46 , 47 .

In the agricultural sector, informational interventions (e.g., early warning, farmer schools, extension services) were the only intervention with clearly positive effects on both risk reduction and development-related outcomes. This confirms the importance of perceptions and learning in environments impacted by climate change. Informational interventions can not only empower households and communities 48 , but also allow governments and non-governmental organizations to understand farmer perceptions and how they influence their decision-making and risk-taking 49 . These interventions also question preconceptions, assumptions, and beliefs about the food system, which can result in paradigm shifts and new opportunities for transformational development 50 . Also, our results about the positive effects of technological and built-infrastructure interventions (e.g., investments in water infrastructure to improve crop yields, and transitions from dryland to irrigation cultivation) to reduce social or economic vulnerability echoes previous findings about the importance of effective water management for development in the Global South 51 , 52 .

A number of key messages for development practitioners, governments and NGOs can be drawn from our results. First, although interventions may have multiple effects, there are still patterns linking types of interventions and outcomes; thus, there is an opportunity for policymakers and practitioners to tailor their interventions to optimize the outcomes those interventions are most effective with. Some dyads of interventions and outcomes showed indeed more robust results than others (i.e., NbS and hazard and exposure reduction in the coastal sector; and informational interventions and social or economic vulnerability in the agricultural sector). Second, policy makers should assess the effects of their interventions in conjunction with other influential factors. As shown in the results, there is a variety of influential factors (covariates in statistical terms) that intervention assessments need to control for. Ultimately, those factors inform about the scope conditions under which the effects of interventions could be maximized. Third, there is also the possibility that negative effects occur 53 ; policy makers should be avid to detect these and make corrections early enough in the implementation process.

As further research, our analysis suggests the need to move beyond the debates on individual intervention effectiveness (e.g., hard versus soft, green versus grey interventions) and focus instead on finding synergies between interventions and combinations of interventions 31 , 54 . Implementing multiple interventions in parallel could more effectively target individual and multiple climate risks, reach adaptation outcomes, and create synergies than if they were implemented individually. In our study, combinations of interventions had only slightly more positive effects than single interventions in the agricultural sector. That said, most of those combinations included NbS and technological and social and behavioural interventions 37 , 55 , 56 . Further research is needed to explore whether combinations of certain types of interventions have stronger effects than other combinations or than the interventions alone.

Finally, it is instrumental for enhancing the evidence-base for adaptation policy and programmes, to conduct more primary research closing existing gaps and reduce uncertainties for decision makers. This is particularly the case for the coastal sector, which has relatively little evidence compared to the agricultural sector, and for long-term, development-related outcomes. Moreover, the increasing complexity of development interventions, other particularities such as non-linearity of intervention outcomes or shifting baselines in the context of climate change, as well as the demand for transformational change and adaptive management, are calling for further investments into integrated systems of monitoring, rigorous evaluation and learning capacities 29 , 57 . By the same token, intervention effectiveness assessments need to further include individual, household and community qualitative data, to ensure benefits reach those most at risk or in need in the long term.

Following the IPCC reports 53 , we conceptualize climate risks as the interaction of climate hazards with the vulnerability and exposure of human and natural systems. Interventions of climate change adaptation can reduce and manage these risks as well as contribute to longer term development outcomes. Thus, we classify outcomes into three categories depending on how risk reduction versus development-oriented they are 5 . The categories include:

The reduction of climate hazard and exposure of individuals or communities. An example would be the protection and restoration of mangroves to reduce the risk of coastal flooding.

The reduction of social or economic vulnerability of individuals or communities. An example would be irrigation techniques that reduce the vulnerability of farmers to water scarcity. This category also includes increasing adaptive capacity (i.e., reducing future vulnerability). For example, farmers that diversify their livelihoods or learn about new cropping techniques are less vulnerable to future climate impacts.

The contribution to the enabling environment , including environmental, socioeconomic or institutional improvements at the system-level. Examples are disaster risk programmes or livelihood programmes.

Also, we follow previous research to classify interventions into seven types 5 , 58 (Table  3 ).

Literature debates

Our analysis contributes to two scholarly debates. First, we contribute to the debate of whether it is more effective that interventions target climate protection (here hazards or exposure), or sustainable development more largely (here social vulnerability and adaptive capacity) 5 . In the terminology used before the IPCC’s Special Report for Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX), this debate was often casted into the terms “outcome vulnerability” versus “contextual vulnerability” 59 , 60 . While this debate is not new, it remains unresolved and has direct implications for the distribution of development finance through, e.g., the Green Climate Fund 61 . While some commentators advocate for climate-risk oriented criteria for funding allocation, others, particularly from developing countries, argue for a broader development framing of adaptation. While it is not possible to resolve this debate conceptually, empirical contributions regarding the relative effectiveness of interventions addressing protection versus sustainable development capacity can advance the practical side of this debate.

Complementarily, we contribute to the debate around the effectiveness of different types of interventions. Some commentators have argued that a focus on hard (technological and infrastructure-based) interventions, may pay insufficient attention to governance and social barriers that are better addressed by soft (behavioural or institutional) interventions 30 . Scholars have, for example, pointed to the lack of clear organizational responsibilities for adaptation at higher levels of governance 62 , conflicts and trade-offs arising from other sectoral policies 63 and complexity and routines of government organizations 64 , and interplay between private and public responsibilities 65 as barriers to adaptation. Thus, assessing adaptation effectiveness requires considering a broad range of adaptation intervention types 58 .

The debate over hard versus soft interventions has in recent years taken on the role of NbS. There is growing interest in NbS as promising adaptation measures in a range of settings, due to their potential cost-effectiveness and multiple benefits 31 . Globally, the IUCN has recently developed a Global Standard on NbS 66 . while NbS for adaptation are particularly emphasized in both the EU Adaptation Strategy 67 and the EU Green Deal 68 . However, whether NbS can facilitate sustainable development better than other infrastructure-based solutions is still debated 31 , 45 , 69 , 70 .

A debate this study does not contribute directly but deserves also to be mentioned is the top-down bias of effectiveness assessments and the need to further integrate community perceptions, and locally understood social and economic processes that play a critical role in experiences of ‘effective’ interventions 71 . Our study builds indeed on many studies that have been carried out by outsiders with predefined understandings of effectiveness. This limitation is related to the quantitative nature of the studies reviewed.

This systematic review selected studies that were already included in an evidence gap map (EGM) on adaptation, which is one of the most up-to-date and comprehensive databases on the effectiveness of adaptation interventions in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) 5 . The EGM followed the systematic map protocol, which followed guidelines set out by the Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation 72 , and included quantitative or mixed-methods studies and systematic reviews in the analysis. The inclusion criteria for this meta-analysis were adapted from previous research 5 following the PICOS standard (Table  4 ).

In a previous study 5 , we systematically searched databases of peer-reviewed literature (Web of Science, Scopus, 3ie database and CEE library) and grey literature from several organisational websites for studies on climate change adaptation in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) as defined by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). All literature that had an English abstract and was written in English, Spanish, French or German was included. This yielded a sample of 13,121 studies. The sample was narrowed down by excluding books, book sections and conference proceedings and screening abstract and tiles following several exclusion criteria. Importantly for our purpose, all studies that did not report on the effectiveness of an adaptation intervention were excluded. This yielded a final set of 463 studies (Fig.  4 ), which is published as an interactive EGM at the website of the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) 29 .

Interventions 1 and 3 refer to NbS and technological interventions.

In the previous study 5 , we categorized studies into four sectors of (i) Water, (ii) Forestry, fishing and agriculture, (iii) Land-use and built environment, and (iv) Society, economy and health. Since we focused only on the coastal and agricultural sectors, we excluded 152 studies from their database that did not match these two sectors. We focused on the agricultural and coastal sectors for several reasons. The agricultural sector, along with the forest sector are most directly related with development in LMICs due to the importance of rural areas and the primary sector for those countries’ economies. The forestry sector is critical for climate change mitigation, but the impact of climate change on forest activities has been less documented than in the agricultural sector. The coastal sector has been pioneering in studies of climate change and additionally allowed us to capture intervention effects in urbanized areas. Also, interventions in the coastal sector have tended to target risk reduction outcomes, so by including those interventions we are able to widen the diversity of outcomes studied (the agricultural sector tends to include development-related outcomes).

We also excluded primary or non-review studies on NbS or technological interventions in the agricultural sector, and studies which did not have sufficient data for coding. Primary studies on NbS or technological interventions in the agricultural sector were excluded due to the disproportionately large number of systematic reviews for these interventions, which we included in the review. This led to a final batch of 103 included studies, 19 and 84 of which belonged to the coastal and agricultural sectors, respectively (Fig.  4 ; see also  Supplementary References ).

The included studies were coded into a comprehensive coding matrix, which included information about: author, publication year, country, study design, sector, intervention type, outcome category, and effects direction and size, among other variables (see coding book below). We employed a rigorous qualitative consensus approach 73 to ensure the reliability of our coding. This involved clear coding guidelines, regular communication among coders and iterative discussions to reach agreement. The coding included two stages. First, all three coders coded 6 studies collaboratively until agreement reached saturation; all coders coded the same study and discussed their codes, one study after the other, until coders reached a similar understanding of the variables (i.e., until coders had the same codes of the intervention type, outcome, and effects direction and size variables for two studies in a row). Then, the database of studies was split among the coders and each of them coded her/his batch independently. Questions at this stage were nevertheless solved collaboratively. This strategy enabled us to maintain a high level of coding consistency, enhancing the validity of our study’s findings. The database had a hierarchical design: one study could include multiple observations, which were the combination of one intervention and one effect of this intervention in an outcome. Table  5 includes the final number of studies and observations per sector.

To measure effects, we looked at the direction and size of effects (“Effects direction” and “Effect size” variables), and the statistical significance of the findings. Direction was coded as positive, neutral or negative. Neutral was coded when the effects were not significant, or the author explicitly mentioned that there were no effects. Effect size was coded via an ordinal scale (“small”, “medium”, “high”) whenever the effects direction was positive or negative 74 . Coding effect sizes required translating the quantitative measures such as means, non-parametric tests, regression coefficients into our ordinal scale. Whenever authors complemented quantitative metrics with qualitative comments about the size we used the latter. In the studies where authors did not qualify effects as being “small”, “medium” or “high” we assumed that the size of the effects was “medium”. The only exception to this rule were observations where the metric value was very small (this was the case for <0.1 beta regression coefficients, mean differences, average treatment effects, and <5% percentage differences between the intervention and control groups).

The data was checked for several issues: (1) typos: although many variables included fixed response options others (e.g., country) did not; (2) incongruencies: in our coding book, the coding of some variables depended on the coding of other variables (for example, if the “Effects direction” variable was coded as “neutral”, then the “Effects size” variable had to be coded as “NA”); and blank cells: “No information” and “Not Applicable” values were coded as “33” and “99”. Thus, the dataset should not contain blank cells. Also, “Effects direction” and “Effects size” were recoded into “Effects direction 7-point” with the following values: large significant negative =−3, small/ medium sig. neg. =−2, very small sig. neg./negligible =−1, neutral/ not sig. =0, very small sig. pos./ negligible =1, small/ medium sig. pos. =2, large sig. pos. =3.

Out of the 103 studies of the database, 11 contained more than 5 observations per study (marked with an asterisk in Supplementary Table  1 ) and 9 of them contained more than 3 observations about one intervention and outcome type indicating the same effects direction (marked with two asterisks in Supplementary Table  1 ). Although many observations from single studies may be less generalizable, our unit of analysis was the case and not the study and we weighted all observations equally.

Data limitations

The systematic review faced several methodological limitations that may inform future studies. First, there was the potential for a sample bias in the included studies. The keyword search included only terms in English, and thus excluded potentially relevant articles in other languages. Second, included studies were mostly quantitative studies. Thus, adaptation interventions that are more prone for qualitative evaluations (e.g., informational and institutional interventions or interventions targeting the enabling environment) are likely underrepresented. Also, the lack of qualitative data prevented us from questioning definitions of effectiveness and identifying patterns in the causal mechanisms that connect interventions and outcomes. Although this was not part of our objective, it is an important area of research in the field. Qualitative assessments can not only be particularly effective at capturing the impact of multiple-hazard risks 75 but have also been accepted as a necessary source of rich data in integrated environmental assessment by the IPCC, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment regional and national studies 76 .

Third, there was the potential for publication bias. This review included only 19 studies from the coastal sector, which in turn covered mostly observations about NbS and social/behavioural interventions. This clustering of intervention types in the coastal sector may be due to the low implementation costs of these interventions compared to infrastructure interventions (e.g., building sea walls or transport infrastructure) specifically in and for LMICs. Infrastructure interventions may be underrepresented also because there tend to be fewer ex-post impact evaluations and more ex-ante predictive and modelling studies, the latter providing no indication of effectiveness. More generally, few studies indicated interventions having negative outcomes. This apparently positive-results publication bias is of potentially major concern.

Fourth, a general issue in extracting the data was that some studies do not label interventions as adaptation interventions, making it difficult to identify them in the literature 77 . This may be specifically the case for technical interventions in the coastal context, as these are often reported in coastal engineering journals without reference to climate change or adaptation. Relatedly, many studies are not explicit about specific climate change threats like droughts, floods, increases in temperature, or climatic variability. This complicated their link to intervention types and outcome categories. While some interventions like financial aid or certain infrastructure solutions may well apply to short term hazards, other interventions like institutional reforms or certain NbS may be more suitable for longer term changes 78 .

Relatedly, just half of the studies in the agricultural sector and 60% in the coastal sector included multilevel regression analyses, pointing to a variety of influential factors (i.e., covariates) other than the interventions that would need further consideration. Studies in the coastal sector, for example, have shown the importance of controlling the effectiveness of mangroves to protect population for aspects such as population density, elevation, distance from rivers or warning measures 39 . And, in the agricultural sector, studies have illustrated how resilience against droughts and floods can be explained by “Informational/educational” interventions like extension services, as well as other factors like farmers’ wealth, education, marital status, institutional participation, size of cultivated land, number of farm plots, technological improvements, access to information or savings 40 .

Last, the review was bound by the methodological challenge of coding a wide diversity of studies. Adaptation is highly heterogeneous involving a range of different actors, activities, scales and sectors and is thus subject to a ‘dependent variable problem’, whereby studies of adaptation effectiveness often measure very different aspects and therefore require very careful definitions of contexts, interventions and outcomes 17 , 79 . We partially coped with this challenge by classifying interventions and outcomes into categories and coding effect sizes via an ordinal scale. Given the large heterogeneity of studies and outcomes, however, a more rigorous quantitative meta-analysis was not possible. Lack of information in the reviewed studies prevented the systematic coding of social, economic, institutional and biophysical contexts in which the interventions were implemented as well as potential barriers and limits to adaptation, even though these may considerably influence the effectiveness of adaptation interventions.

Data availability

The data used to create all figures is available online ( https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.24638403 ; URL: https://figshare.com/s/f88bb9b51e160380e1b3 ). See also Supplementary Table  1 for a synthesis of the database. The full dataset of the study can be accessed at the Digital Documents Repository CORA RDR of the Autonomous University of Barcelona ( https://doi.org/10.34810/data1149 ) 81 . The dataset contains categorical, ordinal and interval variables and is contained in an Excel file. There are no accession codes. The original Evidence Gap database can be accessed at the website of the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation ( https://egmopenaccess.3ieimpact.org/evidence-maps/adaptegmieu ).

Bennich, T., Weitz, N. & Carlsen, H. Deciphering the scientific literature on SDG interactions: a review and reading guide. Sci. Total Environ. 728 , 138405 (2020).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Nilsson, M., Griggs, D. & Visbeck, M. Policy: map the interactions between Sustainable Development Goals. Nature 534 , 320–322 (2016).

Article   Google Scholar  

White, H. & Waddington, H. Why do we care about evidence synthesis? An introduction to the special issue on systematic reviews. J. Dev. Effect 4 , 351–358 (2012).

Klöck, C. & Nunn, P. D. Adaptation to climate change in small island developing states: a systematic literature review of academic research. J. Environ. Dev. 28 , 196–218 (2019).

Doswald, N. et al. Evidence Gap and Intervention Heat Maps of Climate Change Adaptation in Low-and Middle-Income Countries . DEval Discussion Paper 2/2020. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.11654.45127 (2020).

Leppert, G. et al. Evaluation of Interventions for Climate Change Adaptation: Instruments for Managing Residual Climate Risks (DEval, 2021).

Adu, M. O., Yawson, D. O., Armah, F. A., Abano, E. E. & Quansah, R. Systematic review of the effects of agricultural interventions on food security in northern Ghana. PLoS One 13 , e0203605 (2018).

Magombeyi, M. S., Taigbenu, A. E. & Barron, J. Effectiveness of agricultural water management technologies on rainfed cereals crop yield and runoff in semi-arid catchment: a meta-analysis. Int. J. Agricult. Sustain. 16 , 418–441 (2018).

Raseduzzaman, M. & Jensen, E. S. Does intercropping enhance yield stability in arable crop production? A meta-analysis. Eur. J. Agron. 91 , 25–33 (2017).

Zhao, X. et al. Crop yields under no-till farming in China: a meta-analysis. Eur. J. Agron. 84 , 67–75 (2017).

Dinar, A., Hassan, R., Mendelsohn, R. & Benhin, J. Climate Change and Agriculture in Africa: Impact Assessment and Adaptation Strategies (Routledge, 2012).

Nazarnia, H., Nazarnia, M., Sarmasti, H. & Wills, W. O. A systematic review of civil and environmental infrastructures for coastal adaptation to sea level rise. Civil Eng. J. 6 , 1375–1399 (2020).

Toimil, A., Losada, I. J., Nicholls, R. J., Dalrymple, R. A. & Stive, M. J. F. Addressing the challenges of climate change risks and adaptation in coastal areas: a review. Coast. Eng. 156 , 103611 (2020).

McNamara, K. E. et al. An assessment of community-based adaptation initiatives in the Pacific Islands. Nat. Clim. Change 10 , 628–639 (2020).

Constenla-Villoslada, S., Liu, Y., Wen, J., Sun, Y. & Chonabayashi, S. Large-scale land restoration improved drought resilience in Ethiopia’s degraded watersheds. Nat. Sustain. 5 , 488–497 (2022).

Barbour, E. J. et al. The unequal distribution of water risks and adaptation benefits in coastal Bangladesh. Nat. Sustain. 5 , 294–302 (2022).

Berrang-Ford, L., Ford, J. D. & Paterson, J. Are we adapting to climate change? Glob. Environ. Change 21 , 25–33 (2011).

McNamara, K. E. & Buggy, L. Community-based climate change adaptation: a review of academic literature. Local Environ. 22 , 443–460 (2016).

Walker, W. E., Haasnoot, M. & Kwakkel, J. H. Adapt or perish: a review of planning approaches for adaptation under deep uncertainty. Sustainability 5 , 955–979 (2013).

Roggero, M., Bisaro, A. & Villamayor-Tomas, S. Institutions in the climate adaptation literature: a systematic literature review through the lens of the Institutional Analysis and Development framework. J. Inst. Econ. 14 , 423–448 (2018).

Google Scholar  

Arnott, J. C., Moser, S. C. & Goodrich, K. A. Evaluation that counts: a review of climate change adaptation indicators & metrics using lessons from effective evaluation and science-practice interaction. Environ. Sci. Policy 66 , 383–392 (2016).

Mimura, N. et al. Adaptation planning and implementation. Climate Change 2014 Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects 869–898. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415379.020 (2015).

Wilby, R. L. et al. A review of climate risk information for adaptation and development planning. Int. J. Climatol 29 , 1193–1215 (2009).

Bisaro, A. & Hinkel, J. Mobilizing private finance for coastal adaptation: a literature review. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 9 , e514 (2018).

Berrang-Ford, L., Pearce, T. & Ford, J. D. Systematic review approaches for climate change adaptation research. Reg. Environ. Change 15 , 755–769 (2015).

Adger, N. Vulnerability. Glob. Environ. Change 16 , 268–281 (2006).

Sudmeier-Rieux, K. et al. Scientific evidence for ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction. Nat. Sustain. 4 , 803–810 (2021).

Owen, G. What makes climate change adaptation effective? A systematic review of the literature. Glob. Environ. Change 62 , 102071 (2020).

Noltze, M., Köngeter, A., Mank, I., Moull, K. & Rauschenbach, M. Evaluation of Interventions for Climate Change Adaptation. Synthesis Report (DEval, 2023).

Biesbroek, G. R., Termeer, C. J. A. M., Klostermann, J. E. M. & Kabat, P. Rethinking barriers to adaptation: Mechanism-based explanation of impasses in the governance of an innovative adaptation measure. Glob. Environ. Change 26 , 108–118 (2014).

Seddon, N. et al. Understanding the value and limits of nature-based solutions to climate change and other global challenges. Philosoph. Trans. R. Soc. B 375 , 20190120 (2020).

Mallick, B. & Sultana, Z. Livelihood after relocation—evidences of Guchchagram project in Bangladesh. Soc. Sci. 6 , 76 (2017).

Bhattacharjee, K. & Behera, B. Does forest cover help prevent flood damage? Empirical evidence from India. Glob. Environ. Change 53 , 78–89 (2018).

Ajibade, I. et al. Assessing the bio-psychosocial correlates of flood impacts in coastal areas of Lagos, Nigeria. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 58 , 445–463 (2015).

Leclerc, C. et al. Indigenous past climate knowledge as cultural built-in object and its accuracy. Indigenous past climate knowledge as cultural built-in object and its accuracy. Ecol. Soc. 18 , 22 (2013).

Wang, Y. J., Huang, J. K. & Wang, J. X. Household and community assets and farmers’ adaptation to extreme weather event: the case of drought in China. J. Integr. Agric. 13 , 687–697 (2014).

Rahut, D. B. & Ali, A. Impact of climate-change risk-coping strategies on livestock productivity and household welfare: empirical evidence from Pakistan. Heliyon 4 , e00797 (2018).

Gori Maia, A., et al. Climate change and adaptive strategies in agriculture: assessing the impacts on small farmers in the Brazilian Sertão https://doi.org/10.22004/AG.ECON.236255 (2016).

Das, S. & Vincent, J. R. Mangroves protected villages and reduced death toll during Indian super cyclone. Proc Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106 , 7357–7360 (2009).

Boka, G. T. Measuring Resilience to Climate Change in Ethiopian (African Development Bank, 2017).

Hasegawa, T. et al. Risk of increased food insecurity under stringent global climate change mitigation policy. Nat. Clim. Change 8 , 699–703 (2018).

Diwakar, V. & Lacroix, A. Climate shocks and poverty persistence: Investigating consequences and coping strategies in Niger, Tanzania, and Uganda. Sustain. Dev. 29 , 552–570 (2021).

Hertel, T. W. & Rosch, S. D. Climate change, agriculture, and poverty. Appl. Econ. Perspect Policy 32 , 355–385 (2010).

Ruangpan, L. et al. Nature-based solutions for hydro-meteorological risk reduction: a state-of-the-art review of the research area. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 20 , 243–270 (2020).

Chausson, A. et al. Mapping the effectiveness of nature-based solutions for climate change adaptation. Glob. Chang Biol. 26 , 6134–6155 (2020).

Keesstra, S. et al. The superior effect of nature based solutions in land management for enhancing ecosystem services. Sci. Total Environ. 610–611 , 997–1009 (2018).

Fund, A. Agroecology: A Nature-based Food System-NBS Proposal from the AgroEcology Fund. UN Secretary General Climate Action Summit (2019).

Phuong, L. T. H. et al. Using a social learning configuration to increase Vietnamese smallholder farmers’ adaptive capacity to respond to climate change. Local Environ. 23 , 879–897 (2018).

Eitzinger, A., Binder, C. R. & Meyer, M. A. Risk perception and decision-making: do farmers consider risks from climate change? Clim. Change 151 , 507–524 (2018).

Jagustović, R. et al. Better before worse trajectories in food systems? An investigation of synergies and trade-offs through climate-smart agriculture and system dynamics. Agric. Syst. 190 , 103131 (2021).

Sowers, J. et al. Climate change, water resources, and the politics of adaptation in the Middle East and North Africa. Clim. Change 104 , 599–627 (2010).

Mukheibir, P. Water resources management strategies for adaptation to climate-induced impacts in South Africa. Water Resour. Manag. 22 , 1259–1276 (2008).

Pörtner, H.-O. eds. et al. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: Working Group II Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge University Press, 2022).

Waaswa, A., Oywaya Nkurumwa, A., Mwangi Kibe, A. & Ngeno Kipkemoi, J. Climate-Smart agriculture and potato production in Kenya: review of the determinants of practice. Clim. Dev. 14 , 75–90 (2021).

Khanal, U., Wilson, C., Hoang, V.-N. & Lee, B. Farmers’ adaptation to climate change, its determinants and impacts on rice yield in Nepal. Ecol. Econ. 144 , 139–147 (2018).

Mapfumo, P., Adjei-Nsiah, S., Mtambanengwe, F., Chikowo, R. & Giller, K. E. Participatory action research (PAR) as an entry point for supporting climate change adaptation by smallholder farmers in Africa. Environ. Dev. 5 , 6–22 (2013).

Whitfield, S. et al. Exploring temporality in socio-ecological resilience through experiences of the 2015–16 El Niño across the Tropics. Glob. Environ. Change 55 , 1–14 (2019).

Biagini, B., Bierbaum, R., Stults, M., Dobardzic, S. & McNeeley, S. M. A typology of adaptation actions: a global look at climate adaptation actions financed through the Global Environment Facility. Glob. Environ. Change 25 , 97–108 (2014).

McGray, H., Hammill, A., Bradley, R., Schipper, L. & Parry, J.-E. Weathering the Storm: Options for Framing Adaptation and Development Vol. 57 (World Resources Institute Washington, 2007).

Obrien, K., Eriksen, S., Nygaard, L. P. & Schjolden, A. N. E. Why different interpretations of vulnerability matter in climate change discourses. Clim. Policy ( Earthscan ) 7 , 73–88 (2007).

Hultman, N., Lou, J. & Hutton, S. A review of community co-benefits of the clean development mechanism (CDM). Environ. Res. Lett. 15 , 053002 (2020).

Storbjörk, S. It takes more to get a ship to change course’: barriers for organizational learning and local climate adaptation in Sweden. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 12 , 235–254 (2010).

Torhan, S. et al. Tradeoffs and synergies across global climate change adaptations in the food‐energy‐water nexus. Earths Future 10 , e2021EF002201 (2022).

Stojanovic, T. & Barker, N. Improving governance through local coastal partnerships in the UK. Geogr. J. 174 , 344–360 (2008).

Urwin, K. & Jordan, A. Does public policy support or undermine climate change adaptation? Exploring policy interplay across different scales of governance. Glob. Environ. Change 18 , 180–191 (2008).

IUCN. Guidance for Using the IUCN Global Standard for Nature-based Solutions. A User-Friendly Framework for the Verification, Design and Scaling Up of Nature-Based Solutions (IUCN, 2020).

European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Regions. Forging a climate-resilient Europe - the new EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change. COM(2021) 82 final (2021).

European Environmental Agency (EPA). The European Environment—State and Outlook 2020 Knowledge for Transition to a Sustainable Europe (Publications Office of the European Union, 2019).

DeLonge, M. & Basche, A. Managing grazing lands to improve soils and promote climate change adaptation and mitigation: a global synthesis. Renew. Agricult. Food Syst. 33 , 267–278 (2018).

Gedan, K. B., Kirwan, M. L., Wolanski, E., Barbier, E. B. & Silliman, B. R. The present and future role of coastal wetland vegetation in protecting shorelines: answering recent challenges to the paradigm. Clim. Change 106 , 7–29 (2011).

Gotham, K. F. & Campanella, R. Coupled vulnerability and resilience: the dynamics of cross-scale interactions in post-Katrina New Orleans. Ecol. Soc. 16 , (2011).

Collaboration for Environmental Evidence. Guidelines and standards for evidence synthesis in environmental management , version 5.1. (eds Pullin, A. S., Frampton, G. K., Livoreil, B. & Petrokofsky, G.) www.environmentalevidence.org/information-for-authors (2022).

Cascio, M. A., Lee, E., Vaudrin, N. & Freedman, D. A. A team-based approach to open coding: considerations for creating intercoder consensus. Field Methods 31 , 116–130 (2019).

Creutzig, F. et al. Demand-side solutions to climate change mitigation consistent with high levels of well-being. Nat. Clim. Change 12 , 36–46 (2022).

Gallina, V. et al. A review of multi-risk methodologies for natural hazards: consequences and challenges for a climate change impact assessment. J. Environ. Manag. 168 , 123–132 (2016).

Rounsevell, M. D. A. & Metzger, M. J. Developing qualitative scenario storylines for environmental change assessment. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 1 , 606–619 (2010).

Hofmann, M. E., Hinkel, J. & Wrobel, M. Classifying knowledge on climate change impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability in Europe for informing adaptation research and decision-making: A conceptual meta-analysis. Glob. Environ. Change. 21 , 1106–1116 (2011).

Schoon, M. L. & Cox, M. E. Understanding disturbances and responses in social-ecological systems. Soc. Nat. Resour. 25 , 141–155 (2011).

Dupuis, J. & Biesbroek, R. Comparing apples and oranges: the dependent variable problem in comparing and evaluating climate change adaptation policies. Glob. Environ. Change 23 , 1476–1487 (2013).

Eriksen, M. B. & Frandsen, T. F. The impact of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) as a search strategy tool on literature search quality: a systematic review. J. Med. Libr. Assoc. 106 , 420 (2018).

Villamayor-Tomas, S., Bisaro, A., Albizua, A. & Hinkel, J. Adaptation interventions developing countries database. https://doi.org/10.34810/data1149 (2024).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is part of an evaluation of interventions for climate change adaptation by the German Institute for Development Evaluation (DEval). We are grateful to the anonymous reviewers and the editor-in-chief for insightful comments on earlier versions of this manuscript. Sergio Villamayor-Tomas acknowledges support from the Ayuda de Consolidación Investigadora of the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (CNS2022-136063). Institute of Environmental Science and Technology at the University of Barcelona (ICTA-UAB). This work also contributes to the ‘María de Maeztu Unit of Excellence’ (CEX2019-000940-M).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA), Autonomous University of Barcelona, Carrer de les Columnes s/n, Campus UAB, 08193, Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain

Sergio Villamayor-Tomas

Ostrom Workshop, Indiana University, 513 N Park Ave, Bloomington, IN, 47408, USA

Thaer-Institute, Humboldt University, Invalidenstraße 42, 10099, Berlin, Germany

Global Climate Forum, Neue Promenade 6, 10178, Berlin, Germany

Alexander Bisaro & Jochen Hinkel

German Institute for Development Evaluation (DEval), Fritz-Schäffer-Str. 26, 53113, Bonn, Germany

Kevin Moull, Isabel Mank, Gerald Leppert & Martin Noltze

Basque Centre for Climate Change (BC3), Parque Científico de UPV/EHU, Leioa, Spain

Amaia Albizua

Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (UPV/EHU), Juan Ibáñez de Santo Domingo, 1, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: study conception and design: Sergio Villamayor-Tomas, Alexander Bisaro, Kevin Moull, Amaia Albizua, Isabel Mank, Jochen Hinkel, Gerald Leppert, Martin Noltze; data collection: Sergio Villamayor-Tomas, Alexander Bisaro, Kevin Moull, Amaia Albizua, Isabel Mank, Jochen Hinkel, Gerald Leppert, Martin Noltze; analysis and interpretation of results: Sergio Villamayor-Tomas, Alexander Bisaro, Kevin Moull, Amaia Albizua, Isabel Mank, Jochen Hinkel, Gerald Leppert, Martin Noltze; draft manuscript preparation: Sergio Villamayor-Tomas, Alexander Bisaro, Kevin Moull, Amaia Albizua, Isabel Mank, Jochen Hinkel, Gerald Leppert, Martin Noltze.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sergio Villamayor-Tomas .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information.

Communications Earth & Environment thanks Luca Cetara and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Primary Handling Editor: Alessandro Rubino and Aliénor Lavergne. A peer review file is available.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Peer review file, supplementary material, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Villamayor-Tomas, S., Bisaro, A., Moull, K. et al. Developing countries can adapt to climate change effectively using nature-based solutions. Commun Earth Environ 5 , 214 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-024-01356-0

Download citation

Received : 18 April 2023

Accepted : 29 March 2024

Published : 22 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-024-01356-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

• Search Menu
• Advance Articles
• Editor's Choice
• Collections
• Supplements
• InSight Papers
• BSR Registers Papers
• Virtual Roundtables
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access Options
• Self-Archiving Policy
• About Rheumatology
• About the British Society for Rheumatology
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Dispatch Dates
• Terms and Conditions
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

• < Previous

P061 A comparative analysis of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus, Rheumatoid arthritis and Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis pregnancy outcomes: Results from a three-year prospective, case-controlled, single centre study of 183 patients

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Hanh Nguyen, David A Isenberg, David J Williams, Ian Giles, P061 A comparative analysis of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus, Rheumatoid arthritis and Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis pregnancy outcomes: Results from a three-year prospective, case-controlled, single centre study of 183 patients, Rheumatology , Volume 63, Issue Supplement_1, April 2024, keae163.102, https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/keae163.102

• Permissions Icon Permissions

Patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) have an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes (APO), although the comparative risk of APO in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) pregnancies has not been directly compared. Therefore, this study examined pregnancy outcomes (PO) of subjects with RA, JIA, and SLE, who had all received pre-pregnancy counselling to ensure disease control, to identify whether there are any differences in APO between each individual IRD group. Pregnancy outcomes were compared with healthy pregnant subjects lacking IRD, to determine the comparative risk of APO in RA, JIA and SLE pregnancies.

A prospective case-controlled study was conducted at University College London Hospital from February 2018 to February 2021. A total of 183 patients were enrolled into the study, consisting of 120 pregnant patients including 60 patients with an IRD (n = 29 RA, n = 12 JIA and n = 19 SLE), 60 pregnant patients without any IRD and 63 non-pregnant patients with IRD (n = 30 RA, n = 12 JIA, n = 21 SLE). Pregnancy outcome data was obtained from all pregnant patients and the individual IRD groups’ outcomes were compared to each other and against outcomes from pregnancies without an IRD.

Patients were predominantly Caucasian, ranging from 17-45 years of age. Of 111 reported PO, 99.09% (n = 110) resulted in a live birth (n = 27 (100.00%) RA, n = 11 (100.00%) JIA, n = 18 (94.74%) SLE versus n = 54 (100.00%) pregnancies without IRD). Overall, 5.56% (n = 1 SLE pregnancy) resulted in a spontaneous early trimester miscarriage, 6.36% (n = 7) were pre-term births (n = 3 (11.11%) RA, n = 1 (9.09%) JIA, n = 2 (11.11) SLE pregnancies versus n = 1 (1.85%) pregnancy without IRD). No stillbirths/foetal deaths were reported. Only two maternal complications were reported (n = 1 Group B strep infection, n = 1 gestational diabetes in RA pregnancies). In total six foetal complications were observed in four RA (n = 1 each for enlarged kidney, tongue tied, neonatal jaundice and Group B strep infection), n = 1 JIA (tongue tied) and n = 1 SLE (prolapsed cord) pregnancies. In relation to disease activity statuses in pregnancy, the majority of IRD pregnant patients were in remission (n = 42 (73.68%), n = 18 RA, n = 6 JIA and n = 18 SLE), 28 (49.12%) IRD patients had low disease activity (n = 8 RA, n = 2 JIA and n = 18 SLE) and nine (15.79%) had moderate/high disease activity (n = 6 RA, n = 2 JIA and n = 1 SLE). Only two (3.51%) RA patients reported disease flares during pregnancy, whereas no JIA/SLE patients experienced any flares.

This first prospective case-controlled study of RA, JIA, SLE and healthy pregnancies has identified favourable and comparable PO between IRD pregnancies with good disease control. This study highlights the importance and need for IRD pregnant women to undergo pre-pregnancy counselling and maintenance of disease control during pregnancy to enhance the chances of successful pregnancy outcomes.

H. Nguyen: None. D.A. Isenberg: Consultancies; AstraZeneca, Merck Serono, Eli Lilly, Servier, Genentech. D.J. Williams: Grants/research support; National Institute for Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre. I. Giles: Grants/research support; UCB Pharma.

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Rheumatology Twitter
• BSR Twitter
• BSR Facebook
• Recommend to Your Librarian

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1462-0332
• Print ISSN 1462-0324
• Copyright © 2024 British Society for Rheumatology
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

We use cookies to improve your experience on our site and to show you personalised advertising. To find out more, read our privacy policy and cookie policy

• Our research
• Research institutes and facilities
• Australasian Health Outcomes Consortium

Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration

• Palliative care
• Primary care
• Paediatrics
• Patients, families & friends
• Research & data
• International presence

The Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration (PCOC) aims to improve palliative care patient and carer outcomes.

Participation in PCOC is voluntary. Any service that provides palliative care can join PCOC. Central to the PCOC program is a framework and protocol for routine clinical assessment and response. By embedding the framework into routine clinical practice, a common clinical language is created. This helps identify and respond to needs. It also helps with improving access to palliative care, and generating consistent information to plan and deliver care. Due to its success in achieving  nation-wide improvements in patient outcomes in Australia , PCOC is regarded as a core national palliative care program funded by the Australian Government Department of Health. The PCOC model is also being implemented internationally.  Contact us for more information.

Explore PCOC

The ultimate measure of quality is the outcomes that patients, their families and carers achieve. PCOC is a voluntary program that is improving the quality and outcomes in palliative care in Australia, and internationally.

There are many ways we know we are providing good care. We can measure our processes and display our thank you letters. But how do we know we are improving patient care? Show we do what we say we do. We focus on patient outcomes. The Australian Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration, or PCOC, is the only source of routine palliative care outcome data in Australia and provides the facts about the effect of palliative care. The ultimate measure of quality is the outcomes that our patients and their families and carers achieve.

PCOC is a national voluntary program that is improving the quality and outcomes of palliative care in Australia by producing information to be used by clinicians and by local state and national providers of palliative care, to continually improve care for patients and their families.

PCOC measures outcomes for pain, including physical symptoms, psychological and spiritual needs, as well as family and carer outcomes. This provides evidence to mojito and prove the outcomes of care and drive continuous improvement in palliative care.

How does PCOC work? Let’s look at the six-monthly PCOC cycle. First, clinicians use the assessment tools to assess and respond to each patient’s needs. Then, PCOC reports the assessment data back to you. Benchmarking takes place so you can compare results. Then, PCOC facilitates feedback methods that identify achievements and areas for change. Feedback is an essential part of improvement. And then you start the PCOC cycle again.

PCOC is the world’s largest national routine point-of-care data collection for quality improvement, representing more than 80 per cent of all palliative care patients referred to specialist services in Australia, or 40,000 people each year, measuring outcomes for people as they move between home and hospital.

Does PCOC work? National results show statistically significant improvements over time in all symptom domains and in key palliative care problem domains. PCOC embeds and sustains two key frameworks into routine procedure and practice; the PCOC assessment framework and the quality improvement and change framework. The benefits of the assessment framework include; standard assessment and a common language when planning care or handing over in any care setting, baseline assessment and snapshot of patient needs, the ability to track and respond to patient symptoms, patients and their families and carers are part of the decision making, and care is driven by need. The benefits of the quality improvement and change framework include providing a structure for; evidence for the care being provided, outcomes triggering a review of processes, identifying areas for targeted quality improvement, identifying priorities for clinical and systems management change, and service planning. PCOC also helps with meeting requirements for accreditation by providing evidence of participation in quality improvement, and assists with local, state and national research on patient outcomes.

By firmly embedding a culture of quality improvement through the PCOC program, your service can measure and improve the care it provides, resulting in a better patient and family and carer experience and improved outcomes of care.

Learn more about our work

Get to know us

Access our evidence hub

A message to services, clinicians and researchers

Any service that provides palliative care can join PCOC

COVID-19 data collection

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, PCOC began the immediate small data collection on COVID-19 patients. As an interim solution to capture COVID-19 data, PCOC has developed a simple Excel spreadsheet. This manual system will be in place on an interim basis. It will be replaced by the next version of the PCOC dataset and software, at which time we will expand the diagnosis codes in our routine collection to create a separate code for COVID-19.

PCOC will ask services to submit the data collected in conjunction with the next 6-monthly data submission (commencing 1 July 2020).  Contact us for further information .

Frequently asked questions

• Collapse All
• What is palliative care?
• Is end-of-life care the same as palliative care?
• What is terminal care?
• Why doesn’t PCOC use the terms specialist and generalist palliative care?

Palliative care is care in which the primary clinical purpose or treatment goal is to optimise of the quality of life of a patient or resident that has an active and advanced life-limiting illness. The patient (or resident) will have complex physical, psychosocial and/or spiritual needs. Palliative care is always:

• Delivered under the management of or informed by a clinician with specialised expertise in palliative care, and
• Evidenced by an individualised multidisciplinary assessment and management plan, which is documented in the patient's (or resident's) medical record. The plan must cover the physical, psychological, emotional, social and spiritual needs of the patient, as well as include negotiated goals ( Independent Hospital Pricing Authority ). 

Palliative care is different to end-of-life care.

End-of-life care is provided when a person likely to die within the next 12 months. The person may have an advanced, progressive, incurable condition, or general frailty and a co-existing condition, an existing condition with risk of dying from sudden acute crisis, or a life-threatening acute condition. End-of-life care includes an assessment of physical, spiritual and psychosocial needs, care and treatment, and support of families and carers.

( Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care ; Australian Government Department of Health )

In PCOC, the terminal phase of care is defined as the period when the patient is likely to die in a matter of days. This is sometimes referred to as the period when a patient is actively dying. Terminal care can also be referred to as end-stage care. Terminal care may form part of end-of-life care and part of palliative care.

Within Australia and internationally, not everyone who needs palliative care can access it. Due to the growing ageing population with complex needs, the demand for palliative care will soon outstrip most countries' ability to provide specialist palliative care. Understanding palliative care service provision in terms of service capability, rather than specialist versus generalist care, can help support the growth of palliative care. Service capability includes understanding models of care, the context in which care is provided, the linkages between services, and the skill mix and inputs available. Thinking about service capability helps integrate specialist and generalist palliative care because it highlights the links between different types of services, and this can help with service planning and commissioning. Understanding the capability of services can also help patients, their families and carers access the services that are best suited to meet their needs.

© PCOC UOW 2020. The intellectual property associated with a suite of resources on this website is owned by the Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration (PCOC), University of Wollongong. PCOC has placed resources in the public domain and is happy for others to use them without charge, modification or development. These resources cannot be modified or developed without the consent of the University.

PCOC is a national palliative care project funded by the Australian Government Department of Health .

Continued decline in the incidence of myocardial infarction beyond the COVID-19 pandemic: a nationwide study of the Swedish population aged 60 and older during 2015–2022

• Open access
• Published: 23 April 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Anna C. Meyer   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2749-7179 1 ,
• Marcus Ebeling   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6531-8525 1 , 3 ,
• Enrique Acosta   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6250-4018 2 , 3 &
• Karin Modig   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5151-4867 1  

1 Altmetric

The number of myocardial infarctions declined during the early COVID-19 pandemic but mechanisms behind these declines are poorly understood. COVID-19 infection is also associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction which could lead to higher incidence rates in the population. This study aims to shed light on the seemingly paradoxical relationship between COVID-19 and myocardial infarction occurrence on the population level by exploring long-term trends in incidence rates, case fatality, and proportion of patients dying before reaching a hospital. Our work is based on a linkage of administrative registers covering the entire population aged 60 + in Sweden. Considering both long-term trends since 2015 and seasonal variability, we compared observed incidence, case fatality, and proportions of patients hospitalized to expected values during 2020–2022. Despite more than 200 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases per 1000 inhabitants by the end of 2022, incidence rates of myocardial infarction continued to decline, thus following the long-term trend observed already before 2020. During the first pandemic wave there was an additional incidence decline corresponding to 13% fewer myocardial infarctions than expected. This decline was neither accompanied by increasing case fatality nor by lower shares of patients being hospitalized. We found no increase in the population-level incidence of myocardial infarction despite large-scale exposure to COVID-19, which suggests that the effect of COVID-19 on myocardial infarction risk is not substantial. Increased pressure on the Swedish health care system has not led to increased risks or poorer outcomes for patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

During the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of hospital admissions for myocardial infarction declined across the world [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 ]. Despite the vast number of published studies, it is still unknown whether the observed declines reflect a real decrease in the risk of myocardial infarction or merely the fact that fewer patients reached a hospital. Several studies hypothesized that reduced care seeking among individuals who experienced symptoms of myocardial infarction led to lower numbers of patients presenting in hospitals [ 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 ]. Evidence for this hypothesis is, however, mixed. Although delays in the care of myocardial infarction were observed in some settings, several European studies did not find significantly increased delays between symptom onset and first medical contact for patients with myocardial infarction [ 16 , 19 , 20 ]. Moreover, since timely treatment of myocardial infarction is essential, delays in care seeking would likely result in increasing case fatality and in growing proportions of patients dying before reaching the hospital. Lower admission rates for cardiovascular diseases were indeed accompanied by increased case fatality during the first pandemic year in the United States [ 18 ] but not in several European countries [ 4 , 8 , 14 , 21 ]. However, there are also other hypotheses that could explain the declining number of myocardial infarctions during the early pandemic, such as changes in lifestyle factors, stress levels, and environmental exposures [ 22 ]. These hypotheses would result not only in a decline in the number of patients presenting at hospitals but also in an overall decline in incidence rates.

In parallel, COVID-19 infection has been linked to an increase in the risk of cardiovascular diseases, including acute myocardial infarction [ 23 ]. This suggests that the initial decline in hospital admissions might eventually turn into increasing incidence rates of myocardial infarction in the long run—especially since COVID-19 affected a large share of the population. Moreover, the cardiovascular damage and exacerbation of cardiovascular disease during infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus [ 23 , 24 ] might have affected survival rates for patients with myocardial infarction. Nevertheless, to our knowledge, data reflecting case-fatality throughout the pandemic years have not been presented.

Incidence rates –as well as case fatality– declined continuously during the past decades. Most previous studies did not take this trend into account and directly compared data observed in 2020 to an earlier reference period, usually 2019 [ 3 , 4 , 6 , 7 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 13 , 16 ]. In addition, only a few studies have estimated incidence rates based on accurate measures of person-time at risk, considering the increased mortality due to COVID-19 itself. Previous studies were, moreover, often limited to clinical populations [ 3 , 4 ]. In contrast to administrative registers, the coverage of clinical databases declined during the pandemic [ 25 , 26 ].

With this study, we explore the seemingly paradoxical scenario in which the number of myocardial infarctions decreased in the early pandemic, but subsequent research revealed an elevated risk of myocardial infarction associated with COVID-19 infection. One could thus hypothesize that the incidence of myocardial infarction increased during the later phases of the pandemic. Here, we present population-wide trends in age-specific incidence rates, case fatality and the proportion of patients hospitalized between the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and the end of 2022 in Sweden.

Data and study population

This study is based on a linkage of administrative population registers using the unique personal identification number assigned to each Swedish resident. The entire population over the age of 60 residing in Sweden between 2015 and 2022 was identified in the Total Population Register (TPR). Individuals entered the study population in the month of their 60th birthday and were followed until death, emigration, loss to the registers (i.e., no registration in the TPR without recorded death or emigration), or the end of 2022, whichever came first. Based on weekly data on confirmed cases and COVID-19 deaths in Sweden reported by WHO, we defined the first, second, and third pandemic waves as the time periods 23–03-2020 to 12-07-2020, 19-10-2020 to 23-05-2021, and 20-12-2021 to 15-05-2022, respectively [ 27 ].

Myocardial infarctions were identified in the Cause of Death Register (CDR) and in the National Patient Register (NPR) using the 10th version of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes. The CDR records death dates of all individuals registered in Sweden together with ICD codes for the underlying and contributing causes of death. The NPR contains all hospital admissions and specialized outpatient care visits in the country together with ICD diagnoses assigned by physicians.

In accordance with the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare, incident events were defined through ICD-codes I21 or I22 as main or contributing cause of hospitalization or death occurring at least 28 days apart [ 28 ]. A comparison with clinical data during 2021 showed that this definition yields a sensitivity of 94% for detecting incident myocardial infarction in Sweden [ 28 ]. Older validation studies have further demonstrated excellent positive predictive values (98 and 100%, respectively) [ 28 , 29 ]. Case fatality was defined as the proportion of individuals dying within 30 days after the occurrence of a myocardial infarction. The proportion of patients reaching the hospital was calculated as the number of incident events identified in the NPR divided by all incident events.

Information on place of residence was available on a yearly basis. For the stratification by geographical region, we therefore distinguished between individuals registered in Stockholm County and those registered elsewhere on December 31st of the previous year. A person contributed person-time at risk as well as disease events to the population of Stockholm County if they were registered there at the end of the previous year.

Statistical analyses

For each month between January 2015 and December 2022, we calculated person-years at risk by counting the number of days spent at risk of MI for every individual and transforming the total number of days into years. Incidence rates were calculated as the number of incident myocardial infarctions observed divided by person-time at risk for each month. To compare incidence rates during the pandemic to an appropriate reference, i.e., to the expected incidence in absence of the pandemic, we estimated expected monthly myocardial infarctions for the time period March 2020 to December 2022 considering both long-term incidence trends and within-year seasonal variability between January 2015 and February 2020. A quasi-Poisson generalized additive model, including a log-linear component for the long-term secular trend, a cyclic p-spline for seasonality, and an offset component to control for changes in the population at risk, was separately fitted to each age group and sex. Based on these models, we predicted the expected monthly myocardial infarctions from March 2020 to December 2022 in the absence of the pandemic and computed 95% prediction intervals using bootstrapping with 2000 iterations. All analyses were stratified by sex and reported separately for four age groups (60–69, 70–79, 80–89 and 90 or older).

Sensitivity analyses

In sensitivity analyses, we extracted additional data on outpatient care (e.g., visits to outpatient emergency centers) from the NPR. We calculated the number of incident events based on data from inpatient, outpatient, and death records and calculated the proportions of incident events identified in each data source during the first period of the pandemic (March to December 2020). A marked decline in outpatient care utilization could indicate reduced care seeking by patients. Second, we calculated the number of events that could only be identified through outpatient diagnoses, i.e., that had no matching record in either inpatient or death records, which could indicate limited sensitivity of identifying myocardial infarction in the latter two sources. Note that for outpatient records, we only included those with a main diagnosis of myocardial infarction and excluded records with a code for follow-up examinations (ICD-10: Z09).

The first three waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden (green) together with the cumulative number of confirmed COVID-19 cases per 1000 inhabitants (gray) are shown in Fig.  1 . Since testing capacities were limited in the early pandemic and recommendations to test all suspected cases in laboratories were effectively stopped by the Swedish government during February 2022, the cumulative proportion of the Swedish population affected by the virus likely exceeds the numbers shown in Fig.  1 .

Cumulative number of confirmed COVID-19 cases per 1000 inhabitants in Sweden (shaded grey area) [ 24 ]. The black vertical line indicates the date on which most testing for COVID-19 was stopped by the Swedish government (09–02-2022). Vertical green bands show the first three pandemic waves

Time trends in incidence rates of myocardial infarction

Figure  2 shows trends in annual and monthly incidence rates of myocardial infarction between January 2015 and December 2022 stratified by sex and age group. Annual incidence rates (shown as horizontal lines) declined consistently already before 2020. Between 2015 and 2022, declines in annual incidence rates ranged from 16.2% (men aged 60–69) to 37.7% (women aged 90 and older). Declines in annual rates were roughly linear from 2015 through 2022 with the exception of 2020, which deviated from overall trends by exhibiting lower incidence rates. Monthly incidence rates followed a seasonal pattern with a tendency toward lower rates during summer months and higher rates in December and January (Fig.  2 ).

Monthly and annual incidence rates of myocardial infarction per 100,000 person-years in the Swedish population aged 60 and older stratified by sex and age group, January 2015 to December 2022. Annual incidence rates are shown as thick horizontal lines (transparent). Thin lines reflect monthly incidence rates. Vertical green bands indicate three pandemic wave periods in Sweden

Figure  3 shows the expected (black line) and observed (blue line) incidence rates of myocardial infarction together with 95% prediction intervals from March 2020 to December 2022 in four age groups. During the first wave of the pandemic, incidence rates were consistently lower than expected for all age groups, although the lower level did not fall outside the prediction interval during all months. In contrast, no consistent deviations from expected numbers were observed during the pandemic’s second and third waves or during the remaining months in 2020 to 2022. The pattern of lower-than-expected incidence rates during the first pandemic wave but no consistent deviations from expected rates thereafter was consistent among men and women (Supplementary Fig. 1) and in Stockholm County as well as the rest of Sweden (Supplementary Fig. 2).

Expected (black lines) and observed (blue lines) incidence rates of myocardial infarction per 100,000 person-years in the Swedish population over the age of 60 from March 2020 to December 2022. Expected incidence rates are based on trends since 2015 and shown together with 95% prediction intervals (gray shading). Highlighted dots indicate observed incidence rates that fell outside the prediction intervals. Vertical bands indicate three pandemic wave periods in Sweden

The total number of myocardial infarctions during March to June 2020, i.e., the first pandemic wave (n = 6095), was considerably lower than that during the same period in 2019 (n = 7126), corresponding to a decline of 14.5%. When considering long-term trends, seasonality, and the changing population composition, we estimated approximately 900 (13.0%) fewer myocardial infarctions than expected, largely clustered in age groups between 70 and 89 during March and April 2020 (Fig.  2 ).

Case fatality and proportion of patients receiving hospital care

Figure  4 shows proportions of individuals with incident myocardial infarction who died within 30 days as well as proportions of individuals receiving hospital care between March and December 2022 together with 95% prediction intervals. The respective data stratified by sex are shown in Supplementary Fig. 3. From March to June 2020, 25.5% of all patients died within 30 days of experiencing a myocardial infarction compared with 24.9% during the same period in 2019. Case fatality observed in individual months during 2020–2022 was neither consistently higher nor lower than expected proportions.

Proportion of myocardial infarction cases dying within 30 days (case fatality, lower graphs) and proportion of individuals with myocardial infarction receiving hospital care (upper graphs) in the Swedish population aged 60 and older in four age groups, March 2020 to December 2022. Shaded gray areas show 95% prediction intervals. Highlighted dots indicate observed incidence rates that fell outside the prediction intervals. Vertical green bands indicate three pandemic wave periods in Sweden

The average proportion of incident myocardial infarctions receiving hospital care between March and June overall increased from 81.0% in 2015 to 83.7% in 2019 and remained at 83.6% in 2020. From March to June 2022, 84.6% received hospital care. There were no consistent deviations from expected values (Fig.  4 ). We observed only weak seasonal patterns in case fatality and in the proportion hospitalized.

The number of myocardial infarctions identified in the outpatient register without a record in the inpatient or cause of death data was small. Between 2019 and 2020, this number declined to an extent similar to the number of myocardial infarctions in our main analyses (11.2% compared to 10.3%).

The increased risk of myocardial infarction associated with Covid-19 infection, along with the ideas that monitoring of risk factors has been compromised during the pandemic, and that lockdowns have negatively influenced health behaviours, have led to widespread concern about increasing rates of heart disease following the global pandemic [ 16 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 30 ]. Our results do not support these concerns. Despite the high spread of COVID-19 across the Swedish population, we found that incidence rates of myocardial infarction continued to decline at least until the end of 2022, thus following the long-term downward trend observed already before 2020. While there is an indication that the declining trend may have halted among the oldest men, observed rates still lie well within predicted intervals. Even in Stockholm County, an area in which COVID-19 was already widespread during March and April 2020, when vaccinations were not yet available and medical staff was still inexperienced in treating the virus [ 31 ], we found no evidence for increasing rates of myocardial infarction.

Evaluating changes in the incidence of myocardial infarction is challenging, as rates are shaped by a complex interplay of long-term trends, seasonal fluctuations, and changes in the population at risk. Simple comparisons to earlier years can therefore lead to incorrect conclusions and to an overestimation of differences between the pandemic and prepandemic periods. We fitted expected rates for the years 2020 to 2022 based on the previous years’ trends and seasonal variation also considering changes in the composition of the population at risk. Even in these analyses, we found substantially lower incidence rates; approximately 900 fewer events occurred during the first pandemic wave than expected, a number corresponding to 13% fewer than expected myocardial infarctions during this period.

Competing risk of death from COVID-19 is one proposed mechanism behind the declining number of cardiovascular disease events. Severe COVID-19 infections and cardiovascular diseases share common risk factors [ 22 , 30 ], and it is hence possible that the number of high-risk individuals depleted faster than the total population at risk, thereby not only reducing the total number of myocardial infarctions but also incidence rates. This hypothesis is, however, challenged by consistently lower incidence rates in areas outside of Stockholm County already in March and April 2020. These areas experienced virtually no deaths from COVID-19 in this early phase of the pandemic, yet introduced recommendations for older individuals to stay at home [ 31 ]. Furthermore, we analyzed changes in the composition of the population at risk with respect to age, sex, comorbidity, and care status and found no substantial changes during the pandemic.

The etiological mechanisms behind the notable decline in myocardial infarction in the early stage of a global pandemic are intriguing and remain to be studied further. Altered stress levels, lifestyle, and environmental factors, such as reduced air pollution during lockdown, may have contributed to lowering the risk of acute myocardial infarction [ 22 ]. While many of these factors operate through long-term accumulation of risk, factors that trigger myocardial infarctions in the short term, such as stress or air pollution, may contribute as well [ 32 , 33 ]. Research has shown that air pollution can indeed affect the risk of myocardial infarction within weeks, days and even hours of exposure to pollutants [ 34 , 35 , 36 ]. Even despite the comparatively lenient restrictions during the pandemic, Swedish air pollution levels decreased substantially. WHO reported a roughly 30% lower mean annual concentration of NO 2 fine particles and 18% lower concentrations of PM 10 and PM 2.5 particles during 2020 compared to 2018–2019 in Stockholm [ 37 ].

The absence of higher fatality and of higher proportions of patients dying before receiving care is noteworthy. Clinical processes and staff have been challenged during the pandemic; surgeries have been postponed, and waiting times for patients with many diseases have increased [ 38 ]. Indeed, delays in the care pathways of cardiovascular conditions as well as poorer treatment outcomes have been observed in some studies in low- and middle-income countries [ 16 ]. For the Swedish setting, the clinical register Swedeheart reported that the time to treatment of acute myocardial infarction had not been prolonged during the pandemic [ 26 ]. Reporting to this register is not mandatory and has declined during the pandemic [ 25 , 26 ], but our study based on nationwide administrative data supports the conclusion that increased pressure on the Swedish health care system has not led to poorer outcomes for patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction.

Our study has several strengths. We use nationwide administrative data on the entire Swedish population, which allow us to derive precise estimates of person-time at risk and incident myocardial infarction. While reporting to clinical registers is prone to be disrupted once clinical processes are challenged and staff shortages occur, reporting to administrative registers is mandatory and has a high priority because it is directly linked to the reimbursement of health care costs. Sensitivity and positive predictive values for myocardial infarction in Swedish inpatient data have been shown to be excellent [ 28 , 29 ], Specific ICD codes are available to encode a history of myocardial infarction, limiting the probability of misclassifying historical events as incident events. Nevertheless, we cannot rule out some misclassification. Our data did not allow us to identify myocardial infarctions for which patients did not seek any care, and it is further possible that causes of death are misclassified in some instances. However, this would only induce bias if misclassification changed systematically over time. Although one could argue that the accuracy of cause of death assignment has decreased under the pressure of the pandemic, medical scrutiny may have also been promoted by efforts to determine the presence of COVID-19 infection in deceased individuals. Either way, we obtained similar results when excluding data from death records, indicating that misclassification of cause of death cannot explain the pronounced declines in myocardial infarction incidence in Sweden. Finally, it should be noted that our study is limited to ages 60 and above but Swedish authorities reported that 14% of all myocardial infarctions occured in ages below 60 years as of 2022. Younger ages might have adopted different lifestyles than older people during the pandemic, and it is not certain that our findings can be generalized to the younger population.

The incidence of myocardial infarction among individuals aged 60 + in Sweden continued to decrease between 2020 and 2022, despite concerns about an increased incidence of cardiovascular diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic. During the first wave of the pandemic, there was an additional decline in incidence rates. These declines were neither accompanied by increasing case fatality nor by lower shares of patients being hospitalized. Our findings support the conclusion that increased pressure on the Swedish health care system has not led to increased risks or poorer outcomes for patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction. Our work also suggests that the effect of COVID-19 on myocardial infarction risk is not substantial, as we found no increase in incidence at the population level, despite the large share of the population that has been exposed to COVID-19.

Data availability

Data were provided by the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare and Statistics Sweden. Restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which are thus not publicly accessible. Pseudonymized data are, however, available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of the regional ethics board in Stockholm. Aggregated data on age-specific incidence rates as well as statistical code are available upon request from the corresponding author at [email protected].

Swedish corona commission [Coronakommissionen]. Government report. Sverige under pandemin. Sjukvård och folkhälsa [Sweden during the pandemic. Health care and public health] SOU 2021:89. Stockholm2021.

Folkhälsomyndigheten [Swedish Public Health Agency]. Hur har folkhälsan påverkats av covid-19-pandemin? [How has the Covid-19 pandemic affected public health?]: Folkhälsomyndigheten2021.

Huynh J, Barmano N, Karlsson J-E, Stomby A. Sex and age differences in the incidence of acute myocardial infarction during the COVID-19 pandemic in a Swedish health-care region without lockdown: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Healthy Longevity. 2021;2(5):e283-e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2666-7568(21)00085-4

Mohammad MA, Koul S, Olivecrona GK, et al. Incidence and outcome of myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention during COVID-19 pandemic. Heart. 2020;106(23):1812. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2020-317685 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions [SKR Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner]. Hälso och Sjukvårdsrapporten 2021 [Health and health care report 2021]. Stockholm2021.

Bhatt Ankeet S, Moscone A, McElrath Erin E, et al. Fewer Hospitalizations for acute cardiovascular conditions during the covid-19 pandemic. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76(3):280–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.05.038 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Mesnier J, Cottin Y, Coste P, et al. Hospital admissions for acute myocardial infarction before and after lockdown according to regional prevalence of COVID-19 and patient profile in France: a registry study. The Lancet Public Health. 2020;5(10):e536–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30188-2 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Rattka M, Dreyhaupt J, Winsauer C, et al. Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on mortality of patients with STEMI: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart. 2021;107(6):482. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2020-318360 .

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Seiffert M, Brunner FJ, Remmel M, et al. Temporal trends in the presentation of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular emergencies during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany: an analysis of health insurance claims. Clin Res Cardiol. 2020;109(12):1540–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-020-01723-9 .

Sokolski M, Gajewski P, Zymliński R, et al. Impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) outbreak on acute admissions at the emergency and cardiology departments across Europe. Am J Med. 2021;134(4):482–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2020.08.043 .

Toniolo M, Negri F, Antonutti M, Masè M, Facchin D. Unpredictable fall of severe emergent cardiovascular diseases hospital admissions during the COVID-19 pandemic: experience of a single large Center in Northern Italy. J Am Heart Assoc. 2020;9(13): e017122. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.120.017122 .

Wu J, Mamas Mamas A, de Belder MA, Deanfield John E, Gale CP. Second decline in admissions with heart failure and myocardial infarction during the covid-19 pandemic. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021;77(8):1141–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.12.039 .

König S, Ueberham L, Pellissier V, et al. Hospitalization deficit of in- and outpatient cases with cardiovascular diseases and utilization of cardiological interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic: Insights from the German-wide helios hospital network. Clin Cardiol. 2021;44(3):392–400. https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.23549

Campo G, Fortuna D, Berti E, et al. In- and out-of-hospital mortality for myocardial infarction during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Emilia-Romagna, Italy: a population-based observational study. Lancet Regional Health Europe. 2021;3:100055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanepe.2021.100055

Pourasghari H, Tavolinejad H, Soleimanpour S, et al. Hospitalization, major complications and mortality in acute myocardial infarction patients during the COVID-19 era: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol Heart Vasculature. 2022;41:101058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcha.2022.101058

Nadarajah R, Wu J, Hurdus B, et al. The collateral damage of COVID-19 to cardiovascular services: a meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. 2022;43(33):3164–78. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac227

Sofi F, Dinu M, Reboldi G, et al. Worldwide impact of COVID-19 on hospital admissions for non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTACS): a systematic review with meta-analysis of 553,038 cases. Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjqcco/qcad048

Nogueira RG, Etter K, Nguyen TN, et al. Changes in the care of acute cerebrovascular and cardiovascular conditions during the first year of the covid-19 pandemic in 746 hospitals in the USA: retrospective analysis. BMJ medicine. 2023;2(1): e000207. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjmed-2022-000207 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Lidin M, Lyngå P, Kinch-Westerdahl A, Nymark C. Patient delay prior to care-seeking in acute myocardial infarction during the outbreak of the coronavirus SARS-CoV2 pandemic. Eur J Cardiovasc Nursing J Working Group Cardiovasc Nursing Eur Soc Cardiol. 2021;20(8):752–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjcn/zvab087 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Granström J, Lantz P, Lidin M, Wahlström M, Nymark C. Perceptions of delay when afflicted by an acute myocardial infarction during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2022:zvac021. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjcn/zvac021

Bodilsen J, Nielsen PB, Søgaard M, et al. Hospital admission and mortality rates for non-covid diseases in Denmark during covid-19 pandemic: nationwide population based cohort study. BMJ. 2021;373: n1135. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1135 .

Gorini F, Chatzianagnostou K, Mazzone A, et al. Acute myocardial infarction in the time of COVID-19: a review of biological, environmental, and psychosocial contributors. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(20). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17207371

Katsoularis I, Fonseca-Rodríguez O, Farrington P, Lindmark K, Fors Connolly AM. Risk of acute myocardial infarction and ischaemic stroke following COVID-19 in Sweden: a self-controlled case series and matched cohort study. Lancet (London, England). 2021;398(10300):599–607. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(21)00896-5 .

Bader F, Manla Y, Atallah B, Starling RC. Heart failure and COVID-19. Heart Fail Rev. 2021;26(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10741-020-10008-2 .

National Board of Health and Welfare [Socialstyrelsen]. Hur Covid-19 har påverkat akut vård av äldre med stroke och hjärtinfarkt? [How has Covid-19 affected acute care of older persons with stroke and myocardial infarction?]. Stockholm: National Board of Health and Welfare [Socialstyrelsen]2020 Contract No.: Dnr. 5.7–17529/2020.

Swedish register for heart diseases [Swedeheart]. Annual report 2021: Swedish register for heart diseases [Swedeheart]2022.

World Health Organization. 2023. https://covid19.who.int/region/euro/country/se . Accessed 26.10.2023.

Socialstyrelsen. Kvalitetsdeklaration. Statistik om hjärtinfarkter 20212022.

Ludvigsson JF, Andersson E, Ekbom A, et al. External review and validation of the Swedish national inpatient register. BMC Public Health. 2011;11(1):450. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-11-450 .

Italia L, Tomasoni D, Bisegna S, et al. COVID-19 and Heart failure: from epidemiology during the pandemic to myocardial injury, myocarditis, and heart failure sequelae. Front Cardiovasc Med 2021;8.

Swedish corona commission [Coronakommissionen]. Government report. Sverige under pandemin. Smittspridning och smittskydd [Sweden during the pandemic. Spread and prevention] SOU 2021:89. Stockholm. 2021. https://coronakommissionen.com/publikationer/delbetankande-2/ . 1.

Nawrot TS, Perez L, Künzli N, Munters E, Nemery B. Public health importance of triggers of myocardial infarction: a comparative risk assessment. Lancet (London, England). 2011;377(9767):732–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(10)62296-9 .

Wilbert-Lampen U, Leistner D, Greven S, et al. Cardiovascular events during world cup soccer. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(5):475–83. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0707427 .

Dahlquist M, Frykman V, Hollenberg J, et al. Short-term ambient air pollution exposure and risk of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in sweden: a nationwide case-crossover study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2023;12(21): e030456. https://doi.org/10.1161/jaha.123.030456 .

Sahlén A, Ljungman P, Erlinge D, et al. Air pollution in relation to very short-term risk of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: case-crossover analysis of SWEDEHEART. Int J Cardiol. 2019;275:26–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.10.069 .

Peters A, Dockery DW, Muller JE, Mittleman MA. Increased particulate air pollution and the triggering of myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2001;103(23):2810–5. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.103.23.2810 .

WHO. WHO Ambient Air Quality Database (update 2024). Version 6.1. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2024.

National Board of Health and Welfare [Socialstyrelsen]. Analys av första och andra covid-19-vågen—produktion, köer och väntetider i vården [Analysis of the first and second Covid-19 waves - production, queues and waiting times in the care system]. Stockholm: National Board of Health and Welfare [Socialstyrelsen]2021.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Swedish Research Council of Health, Working Life and Welfare (FORTE) [grant number 2021-00451]. The funding source did not influence data collection, study design or interpretation of findings.

Open access funding provided by Karolinska Institute. This work was supported by the Swedish Research Council of Health, Working Life and Welfare (FORTE) [grant number 2021–00451]. The funding source did not influence data collection, study design or interpretation of findings.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Unit of Epidemiology, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, PO Box 210, 17177, Stockholm, Sweden

Anna C. Meyer, Marcus Ebeling & Karin Modig

Centre for Demographic Studies (CED), Carrer de Ca N’Altayó, Edifici E2 Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, 08193, Bellaterra, Spain

Enrique Acosta

Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Konrad-Zuse-Str. 1, 18057, Rostock, Germany

Marcus Ebeling & Enrique Acosta

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

KM acquired funding for this study. KM and AM initiated the study. AM conducted the literature search. All authors contributed to the design of this study and the selection of methods. AM and ME prepared the data for analysis, and AM, EA, and ME undertook statistical analyses. ME prepared visualizations. AM and KM drafted the manuscript. All authors contributed to the interpretation of findings and critical revision of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anna C. Meyer .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose. The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the regional ethics committee in Stockholm, Karolinska Institutet, Sweden, and performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki (permit numbers Dnr 2011/136–31/5 and Dnr 2020–04753). The board waived the need for patient consent.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 976 kb)

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Meyer, A.C., Ebeling, M., Acosta, E. et al. Continued decline in the incidence of myocardial infarction beyond the COVID-19 pandemic: a nationwide study of the Swedish population aged 60 and older during 2015–2022. Eur J Epidemiol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-024-01118-4

Download citation

Received : 10 November 2023

Accepted : 15 March 2024

Published : 23 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-024-01118-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Myocardial infarction
• Epidemiological monitoring
• Public health
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

Fewer than 1% of federal criminal defendants were acquitted in 2022

Former President Donald Trump pleaded not guilty this week to federal criminal charges related to his alleged mishandling of classified documents after his departure from the White House in 2021. The unprecedented charges against Trump and his subsequent plea raise the question: How common is it for defendants in federal criminal cases to plead not guilty, go to trial and ultimately be acquitted?

The U.S. Justice Department’s indictment of former President Donald Trump, and his subsequent plea of not guilty, prompted Pew Research Center to examine how many defendants in federal criminal cases are acquitted in a typical year. The analysis builds on an earlier Center analysis that examined trial and acquittal rates in federal and state courts.

All statistics cited in this analysis come from the Judicial Business 2022 report by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. Information about the total number of defendants in federal criminal cases in the United States, as well as how their cases ended, is drawn from Table D-4 . Information about defendants in the Southern District of Florida is drawn from Table D-7 and Table D-9 .

The statistics in this analysis include all defendants charged in U.S. district courts with felonies and serious misdemeanors, as well as some defendants charged with petty offenses. They do not include federal defendants whose cases were handled by magistrate judges or the much broader universe of defendants in state courts. Defendants who enter pleas of “no contest,” in which they accept criminal punishment but do not admit guilt, are also excluded.

This analysis is based on the 2022 federal fiscal year, which began Oct. 1, 2021, and ended Sept. 30, 2022.

In fiscal year 2022, only 290 of 71,954 defendants in federal criminal cases – about 0.4% – went to trial and were acquitted, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of the latest available statistics from the federal judiciary . Another 1,379 went to trial and were found guilty (1.9%).

The overwhelming majority of defendants in federal criminal cases that year did not go to trial at all. About nine-in-ten (89.5%) pleaded guilty, while another 8.2% had their case dismissed at some point in the judicial process, according to the data from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.

These statistics include all defendants charged in U.S. district courts with felonies and serious misdemeanors, as well as some defendants charged with petty offenses. They do not include federal defendants whose cases were handled by magistrate judges or the much broader universe of defendants in state courts. Defendants who entered pleas of “no contest,” in which they accept criminal punishment but do not admit guilt, are also excluded. The 2022 federal fiscal year began Oct. 1, 2021, and ended Sept. 30, 2022.

The U.S. Justice Department indicted Trump earlier this month on 37 counts relating to seven criminal charges : willful retention of national defense information, conspiracy to obstruct justice, withholding a document or record, corruptly concealing a document or record, concealing a document in a federal investigation, scheme to conceal, and false statements and representations.

Trump’s case is being heard in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, where acquittal rates look similar to the national average. In fiscal 2022, only 12 of 1,944 total defendants in the Southern District of Florida – about 0.6% – were acquitted at trial. As was the case nationally, the vast majority of defendants in Florida’s Southern District (86.2%) pleaded guilty that year, while 10.7% had their cases dismissed.

It’s not clear from the federal judiciary’s statistics how many other defendants nationally or in the Southern District of Florida faced the same or similar charges that Trump is facing or how those cases ended.

Broadly speaking, however, the charges against Trump are rare . In fiscal 2022, more than eight-in-ten federal criminal defendants in the United States faced charges related to one of four other broad categories of crime: drug offenses (31%), immigration offenses (25%), firearms and explosives offenses (16%) or property offenses (11%). In Florida’s Southern District, too, more than eight-in-ten defendants faced charges related to these four categories.

Trump, of course, is not a typical federal defendant. He is the first former president ever to face federal criminal charges and is running for president again in 2024. The federal case against Trump is still in its early stages, and it’s unclear when – or whether – it will proceed to trial.

• Criminal Justice
• Donald Trump
• Federal Government

John Gramlich is an associate director at Pew Research Center

8 facts about Black Lives Matter

#blacklivesmatter turns 10, support for the black lives matter movement has dropped considerably from its peak in 2020, before release of video showing tyre nichols’ beating, public views of police conduct had improved modestly, for black history month, a look at what black americans say is needed to overcome racial inequality, most popular.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Age & Generations
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Economy & Work
• Family & Relationships
• Gender & LGBTQ
• Immigration & Migration
• International Affairs
• Internet & Technology
• Methodological Research
• News Habits & Media
• Non-U.S. Governments
• Other Topics
• Politics & Policy
• Race & Ethnicity
• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Terms & Conditions

Privacy Policy

Cookie Settings

Reprints, Permissions & Use Policy