From the Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University, New York, NY.
Division of Biostatistics, Department of Population Health Sciences, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY.
Epidemiology. 2021 May 1;32(3):336-346. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000001334.
Interventions can have harmful effects among subgroups they intend to help. The Moving To Opportunity experiment, in which families were randomized to receive a Section 8 housing voucher, was one example. Voucher receipt generally resulted in better long-term mental health and lower substance use and risk behavior outcomes among adolescent girls, but resulted in worse outcomes among adolescent boys. Reasons for this discrepancy and the unintended harmful health effects for boys are unclear. We used mediation analysis to estimate processes through which voucher receipt was hypothesized to affect adolescent mental health and substance use.
We used longitudinal data (10-15 years) on boys enrolled in Moving To Opportunity. We estimated interventional (also known as stochastic) indirect effects of voucher receipt on mental health and substance use outcomes through mediators capturing aspects of the school environment, neighborhood poverty, and instability of the social environment. We also estimated interventional direct effects not operating through these mediators. We used a robust, efficient, nonparametric substitution estimator in the targeted minimum loss-based framework.
Housing voucher receipt increased long-term risk of any diagnostic statistical manual disorder, any mood disorder, any externalizing disorder, and cigarette smoking among boys. The majority (between 69% and 90%) of the total negative long-term effects could be explained by indirect effects through the mediators considered.
This evidence suggests that, even though the intervention had the desired effects on neighborhood poverty and the school environment, these "positives" ultimately negatively impacted the long-term mental health and behaviors of boys.
干预措施可能会对其意图帮助的亚组产生有害影响。“向机会转移”实验就是一个例子,该实验中家庭被随机分配获得第 8 节住房券。一般来说,券的使用会导致少女的长期心理健康状况更好,物质使用和风险行为减少,但会导致少年男孩的结果更差。造成这种差异和男孩意外的健康不良影响的原因尚不清楚。我们使用中介分析来估计券的使用被假设如何影响青少年的心理健康和物质使用。
我们使用了“向机会转移”项目中男孩的纵向数据(10-15 年)。我们通过捕捉学校环境、邻里贫困和社会环境不稳定等方面的中介因素,估计了券的使用对心理健康和物质使用结果的干预性(也称为随机)间接效应。我们还估计了不通过这些中介因素发挥作用的干预性直接效应。我们使用基于有针对性的最小损失的框架中的稳健、高效、非参数替代估计器。
住房券的使用增加了男孩长期患任何诊断统计手册障碍、任何情绪障碍、任何外在障碍和吸烟的风险。考虑到的中介因素可以解释大部分(69%至 90%)的负面长期影响。
这一证据表明,尽管干预措施对邻里贫困和学校环境产生了预期的影响,但这些“积极因素”最终对男孩的长期心理健康和行为产生了负面影响。