ReviewStatistics in medicine2025
Difference-in-Differences for Health Policy and Practice: A Review of Modern Methods.
Review in Statistics in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of a healthy checkout ordinance on the sale of soft drinks and confectionery in Berkeley, CA, USA: a quasi-experimental study.The Lancet. Public health · 2026Article
- Guide to recent advances in difference-in-differences methodology for population health studies.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 2026Article
- Medicaid Expansion and Mortality Among Patients With Colorectal Cancer.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Medication and Acute Care Use in Young Adults With Opioid Use Subject to Medicaid Prescription Caps.JAMA health forum · 2026Article
- Cost-Related Medication Nonadherence After the Inflation Reduction Act.JAMA internal medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Hospital Mergers, Hospital Choice, and Care Quality for Pregnant Enrollees in Medicaid.JAMA health forum · 2025Article
- New York's Basic Health Program Increased Subsidized Insurance Coverage From Preconception To The Postpartum Period.Health affairs (Project Hope) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Difference-in-differences (DiD) is a popular observational causal inference method in health policy, employed to evaluate the real-world impact of policies and programs. To estimate treatment effects, DiD relies on a "parallel trends assumption" that treatment and comparison groups would have had parallel trajectories on average in the absence of an intervention. Recent years have seen both growing use of DiD in health policy and medicine and rapid advancements in DiD methods. To support DiD implementation in these fields, this paper reviews and synthesizes best practices and recent innovations. We provide recommendations to practitioners in four areas: (1) assessing causal assumptions; (2) adjusting for covariates and other approaches to relax causal assumptions; (3) accounting for staggered treatment timing; and (4) conducting robust inference, especially when normal-based clustered standard errors are inappropriate. For each, we explain challenges and common pitfalls in traditional DiD and recommend methods to address these. We explore current treatment of these topics through a focused literature review of medical DiD studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.