Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26946396›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2016

Invited Commentary: An Interdisciplinary Approach for Policy Evaluation.

Summer Sherburne Hawkins, Christopher F Baum

Abstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Summer Sherburne Hawkins
Christopher F Baum

Funding

Early determinants of childhood obesity: Etiology disparities policy analysisR00HD068506 · NICHD · BOSTON COLLEGE · PI HAWKINS, SUMMER SHERBURNE · 2012 to 2014
$701k
NICHD NIH HHS R00 HD068506
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evidence-based policymaking is becoming the norm, but how do we acquire the evidence to inform policies? In their article in the present issue of the Journal, Basu et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2016;183(6):531-538) used difference-in-difference-in-differences models and a synthetic control approach to examine the effects of the 1996 welfare reforms on health outcomes among single mothers. In the present commentary, we discuss the limitations of observational studies for policy evaluation. Difference-in-differences models, from the field of economics, offer a rigorous approach to cope with those limitations.

Indexed as

Health BehaviorMental HealthSocial WelfareFemaleHumansMothersSingle Parentdifference-in-differences modeleconomicspolicy making

Identifiers

PMID26946396
PMCPMC5013927

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.