Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32423438›Full record

SynthesisHealth research policy and systems2020

Using natural experiments to improve public health evidence: a review of context and utility for obesity prevention.

Melanie Crane, Erika Bohn-Goldbaum, Anne Grunseit, Adrian Bauman

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Health research policy and systems, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Associations Between the Built Environment and Adult Obesity and the Mediating Role of Physical Activity: A Systematic Review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Natural experiments in the built environment: evaluating impacts on health.Health promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Melanie CraneThe Australian Prevention Partnership Centre, Sydney School of Public Health, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia. melanie.crane@sydney.edu.au.
Erika Bohn-GoldbaumThe Australian Prevention Partnership Centre, Sydney School of Public Health, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia.
Anne GrunseitThe Australian Prevention Partnership Centre, Sydney School of Public Health, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia.
Adrian BaumanThe Australian Prevention Partnership Centre, Sydney School of Public Health, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia.

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia GNT9100001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNatural experiments are increasingly valued as a way to assess the health impact of health and non-health interventions when planned controlled experimental research designs may be infeasible or inappropriate to implement. This study sought to investigate the value of natural experiments by exploring how they have been used in practice. The study focused on obesity prevention research as one complex programme area for applying natural experiment studies.

methodsA literature search sought obesity prevention research from January 1997 to December 2017 and identified 46 population health studies that self-described as a natural experiment.

resultsThe majority of studies identified were published in the last 5 years, illustrating a more recent adoption of such opportunities. The majority of studies were evaluations of the impact of policies (n = 19), such as assessing changes to food labelling, food advertising or taxation on diet and obesity outcomes, or were built environment interventions (n = 17), such as the impact of built infrastructure on physical activity or access to healthy food. Research designs included quasi-experimental, pre-experimental and non-experimental methods. Few studies applied rigorous research designs to establish stronger causal inference, such as multiple pre/post measures, time series designs or comparison of change against an unexposed group. In general, researchers employed techniques to enhance the study utility but often were limited in the use of more rigorous study designs by ethical considerations and/or the particular context of the intervention.

conclusionGreater recognition of the utility and versatility of natural experiments in generating evidence for complex health issues like obesity prevention is needed. This review suggests that natural experiments may be underutilised as an approach for providing evidence of the effects of interventions, particularly for evaluating health outcomes of interventions when unexpected opportunities to gather evidence arise.

Indexed as

Health PromotionHealth Services ResearchPublic HealthResearch DesignDelivery of Health CareDietExerciseHealth PolicyHumansObesityevaluation methodsnarrative reviewNatural experimentsnutritionobesity preventionphysical activitypopulation health interventionsstudy design

Identifiers

PMID32423438
PMCPMC7236508

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.