Division of Epidemiology, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Centre for Communicable Diseases, International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Int J Epidemiol. 2017 Aug 1;46(4):1251-1276. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyx039.
Many interventions delivered to improve health may benefit not only direct recipients but also people in close physical or social proximity. Our objective was to review all published literature about the spillover effects of interventions on health outcomes in low-middle income countries and to identify methods used in estimating these effects.
We searched 19 electronic databases for articles published before 2014 and hand-searched titles from 2010 to 2013 in five relevant journals. We adapted the Cochrane Collaboration's quality grading tool for spillover estimation and rated the quality of evidence.
A total of 54 studies met inclusion criteria. We found a wide range of terminology used to describe spillovers, a lack of standardization among spillover methods and poor reporting of spillovers in many studies. We identified three primary mechanisms of spillovers: reduced disease transmission, social proximity and substitution of resources within households. We found the strongest evidence for spillovers through reduced disease transmission, particularly vaccines and mass drug administration. In general, the proportion of a population receiving an intervention was associated with improved health. Most studies were of moderate or low quality. We found evidence of publication bias for certain spillover estimates but not for total or direct effects. To facilitate improved reporting and standardization in future studies, we developed a reporting checklist adapted from the CONSORT framework specific to reporting spillover effects.
We found the strongest evidence for spillovers from vaccines and mass drug administration to control infectious disease. There was little high quality evidence of spillovers for other interventions.
许多旨在改善健康的干预措施不仅可能使直接接受者受益,还可能使身体或社会关系密切的人受益。我们的目的是综述所有关于中低收入国家干预措施对健康结果的溢出效应的已发表文献,并确定用于估计这些效应的方法。
我们在 2014 年之前检索了 19 个电子数据库,并对 2010 年至 2013 年的五本相关期刊进行了标题手工检索。我们改编了 Cochrane 协作组的溢出估计质量分级工具,并对证据质量进行了评价。
共有 54 项研究符合纳入标准。我们发现,用于描述溢出的术语种类繁多,溢出方法缺乏标准化,许多研究对溢出的报告也不完善。我们确定了三种主要的溢出机制:减少疾病传播、社会接近度和家庭内资源替代。我们发现,通过减少疾病传播,特别是疫苗和大规模药物治疗,可以获得溢出的最强证据。一般来说,接受干预措施的人群比例与健康改善呈正相关。大多数研究的质量为中等或较低。我们发现某些溢出估计存在发表偏倚的证据,但不存在总效应或直接效应的发表偏倚。为了促进未来研究中报告和标准化的改进,我们根据 CONSORT 框架制定了一个专门针对溢出效应报告的报告检查表。
我们发现,疫苗和大规模药物治疗控制传染病的溢出效应证据最强。其他干预措施的溢出效应证据很少,且质量较高。