How to do (or not to do) . . . Assessing the impact of a policy change with routine longitudinal data

A lack of good quality evidence on the effect of alternative social policies in lowand middle-income countries has been recently underlined and the value of randomized trials increasingly advocated. However, it is also acknowledged that randomization is not always feasible or politically acceptable....

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Health policy and planning 2012-01, Vol.27 (1), p.76-83
1. Verfasser: Lagarde, Mylene
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:A lack of good quality evidence on the effect of alternative social policies in lowand middle-income countries has been recently underlined and the value of randomized trials increasingly advocated. However, it is also acknowledged that randomization is not always feasible or politically acceptable. Analyses using longitudinal data series before and after an intervention can also deliver robust results and such data are often reasonably easy to access. Using the example of evaluating the impact on utilization of a change in health financing policy, this article explains how studies in the literature have often failed to address the possible biases that can arise in a simple analysis of routine longitudinal data. It then describes two possible statistical approaches to estimate impact in a more reliable manner and illustrates in detail the more simple method. Advantages and limitations of this quasi-experimental approach to evaluating the impact of health policies are discussed.
ISSN:0268-1080
1460-2237
DOI:10.1093/heapol/czr004