Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33097937›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of epidemiology2021

Reflection on modern methods: a common error in the segmented regression parameterization of interrupted time-series analyses.

Hong Xiao, Orvalho Augusto, Bradley H Wagenaar

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of epidemiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing papers in PubMed
12.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

66 citing papers in PubMed, 107 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Down syndrome birth rate post Dobbs decision: has it changed?Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Hong XiaoDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5113-2367
Orvalho AugustoDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0005-3968
Bradley H WagenaarDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3351-7175
University of Washington · USEduardo Mondlane University · MZ

Funding

Strengthening the identification and treatment of depression in primary care in MozambiqueK01MH110599 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI WAGENAAR, BRADLEY · 2017 to 2020
$633k
NIMH NIH HHS K01 MH110599
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interrupted time-series (ITS) designs are a robust and increasingly popular non-randomized study design for strong causal inference in the evaluation of public health interventions. One of the most common techniques for model parameterization in the analysis of ITS designs is segmented regression, which uses a series of indicators and linear terms to represent the level and trend of the time-series before and after an intervention. In this article, we highlight an important error often presented in tutorials and published peer-reviewed papers using segmented regression parameterization for the analyses of ITS designs. We show that researchers cannot simply use the product between their calendar time variable and the indicator variable indicating pre- versus post-intervention time periods to represent the post-intervention linear segment. If researchers use this often-presented parameterization, they will get an erroneous result for the level change in their time-series. We show that researchers must take care to use the product between their intervention variable and the time elapsed since the start of the intervention, rather than the time since the beginning of their study. Thus, the second linear segment of the time-series indexing the post-intervention level and trend should be zero before intervention implementation and begin by counting from zero, rather than counting from the time elapsed since the beginning of the study. We hope that this article can clarify segmented regression parameterization for the analysis of ITS designs and help researchers avoid confusing and erroneous results in the level changes of their time-series.

Indexed as

Public HealthResearch DesignCausalityHumansInterrupted Time Series AnalysisTimeInterrupted time-series analysisquasi-experimental design and analysissegmented regression analysis

Identifiers

PMID33097937
PMCPMC8271192
OpenAlexW3093871853

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.