Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36045338›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2022

Estimating effects of health policy interventions using interrupted time-series analyses: a simulation study.

Huan Jiang, Xinyang Feng, Shannon Lange, Alexander Tran, Jakob Manthey, Jürgen Rehm

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Unrecorded alcohol consumption in Lithuania: a modelling study for 2000-2021.Alcohol and alcoholism (Oxford, Oxfordshire) · 2023
    Article
  20. Review
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

6 authors.

Huan JiangInstitute for Mental Health Policy Research, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), 33 Ursula Franklin Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 2S1, Canada. hedy.jiang@utoronto.ca.
Xinyang FengInstitute for Mental Health Policy Research, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), 33 Ursula Franklin Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 2S1, Canada.
Shannon LangeInstitute for Mental Health Policy Research, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), 33 Ursula Franklin Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 2S1, Canada.
Alexander TranInstitute for Mental Health Policy Research, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), 33 Ursula Franklin Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 2S1, Canada.
Jakob MantheyDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Center for Interdisciplinary Addiction Research (ZIS), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.
Jürgen RehmInstitute for Mental Health Policy Research, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), 33 Ursula Franklin Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 2S1, Canada.

Funding

Evaluation of the impact of alcohol control policies on morbidity and mortality in Lithuania and other Baltic statesR01AA028224 · NIAAA · CENTRE FOR ADDICTION AND MENTAL HEALTH · PI REHM, JUERGEN T, ŠTELEMĖKAS, MINDAUGAS · 2020 to 2024
$2.2M
NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA028224
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA classic methodology used in evaluating the impact of health policy interventions is interrupted time-series (ITS) analysis, applying a quasi-experimental design that uses both pre- and post-policy data without randomization. In this paper, we took a simulation-based approach to estimating intervention effects under different assumptions.

methodsEach of the simulated mortality rates contained a linear time trend, seasonality, autoregressive, and moving-average terms. The simulations of the policy effects involved three scenarios: 1) immediate-level change only, 2) immediate-level and slope change, and 3) lagged-level and slope change. The estimated effects and biases of these effects were examined via three matched generalized additive mixed models, each of which used two different approaches: 1) effects based on estimated coefficients (estimated approach), and 2) effects based on predictions from models (predicted approach). The robustness of these two approaches was further investigated assuming misspecification of the models.

resultsWhen one simulated dataset was analyzed with the matched model, the two analytical approaches produced similar estimates. However, when the models were misspecified, the number of deaths prevented, estimated using the predicted vs. estimated approaches, were very different, with the predicted approach yielding estimates closer to the real effect. The discrepancy was larger when the policy was applied early in the time-series.

conclusionEven when the sample size appears to be large enough, one should still be cautious when conducting ITS analyses, since the power also depends on when in the series the intervention occurs. In addition, the intervention lagged effect needs to be fully considered at the study design stage (i.e., when developing the models).

Indexed as

Health PolicyResearch DesignComputer SimulationHumansInterrupted Time Series AnalysisSample SizeGAMMInterrupted time-seriesPolicy evaluationQuasi-experimental designSegmented regressionSimulation

Identifiers

PMID36045338
PMCPMC9429656

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.