Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40093917›Full record

ArticleCurrent epidemiology reports2025

Methods Used to Evaluate the Health Effects of Social Policies: A Systematic Review.

Emily C Dore, Emily Wright, Justin S White, Rita Hamad

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current epidemiology reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Emily C DoreDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.
Emily WrightDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.
Justin S WhiteDepartment of Health Law, Policy, and Management, Boston University School of Public Health.
Rita HamadDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

Funding

The Impacts of County-Level COVID- 19 -Related Public Health and Social Policies on Racial/Ethnic and Socioeconomic Disparities in Mental Health and Healthcare UtilizationU01MH129968 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI HAMAD, RITA · 2021 to 2025
$3.4M
NIMH NIH HHS U01 MH129968
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose of review: Despite the growth of research on social policies and health in recent years, few studies have systematically summarized the methodological approaches used in this growing literature. This review characterizes the range of and trends in analytic methods used in studies of the health effects of US social policies published in leading health journals during January 2014-July 2024. Recent findings: Among the 117 studies reviewed, confounder-control approaches were the most commonly used method to assess health effects of social policies. Quasi-experimental methods were also frequently used, especially difference-in-differences designs. Heterogeneous subgroup effects were consistently assessed. Summary: Although there was frequent use of quasi-experimental designs that meet standards for rigorous evidence used to inform policymaking, many opportunities for improvement remain. We suggest improvements to data infrastructure, highlight less frequently studied policies as fruitful future research opportunities, and encourage researchers to implement quasi-experimental approaches best suited to identify causal estimates.

Indexed as

health equitypolicy evaluationquasi-experimentalsocial policiessystematic reviewUnited States

Identifiers

PMID40093917
PMCPMC11908689

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.