Am J Epidemiol. 2021 Nov 2;190(11):2474-2486. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwab185.
Policy responses to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), particularly those related to nonpharmaceutical interventions, are unprecedented in scale and scope. However, evaluations of policy impacts require a complex combination of circumstance, study design, data, statistics, and analysis. Beyond the issues that are faced for any policy, evaluation of COVID-19 policies is complicated by additional challenges related to infectious disease dynamics and a multiplicity of interventions. The methods needed for policy-level impact evaluation are not often used or taught in epidemiology, and they differ in important ways that may not be obvious. Methodological complications of policy evaluations can make it difficult for decision-makers and researchers to synthesize and evaluate the strength of the evidence in COVID-19 health policy papers. Here we 1) introduce the basic suite of policy-impact evaluation designs for observational data, including cross-sectional analyses, pre-/post- analyses, interrupted time-series analysis, and difference-in-differences analysis; 2) demonstrate key ways in which the requirements and assumptions underlying these designs are often violated in the context of COVID-19; and 3) provide decision-makers and reviewers with a conceptual and graphical guide to identifying these key violations. Our overall goal is to help epidemiologists, policy-makers, journal editors, journalists, researchers, and other research consumers understand and weigh the strengths and limitations of evidence.
针对 2019 年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)的政策反应,特别是与非药物干预相关的政策反应,在规模和范围上都是前所未有的。然而,政策影响的评估需要复杂的环境、研究设计、数据、统计和分析的结合。除了任何政策都面临的问题外,COVID-19 政策的评估还因传染病动态和多种干预措施的额外挑战而变得复杂。政策层面影响评估所需的方法在流行病学中并不常用或教授,并且在重要方面存在差异,这些差异可能不明显。政策评估的方法复杂性可能使决策者和研究人员难以综合和评估 COVID-19 卫生政策文件中证据的强度。在这里,我们 1)介绍了用于观察性数据的基本政策影响评估设计套件,包括横断面分析、前后分析、中断时间序列分析和差异分析;2)展示了在 COVID-19 背景下,这些设计的基本要求和假设经常被违反的关键方式;3)为决策者和审查者提供了一个概念和图形指南,以识别这些关键违规行为。我们的总体目标是帮助流行病学家、政策制定者、期刊编辑、记者、研究人员和其他研究消费者理解和权衡证据的优缺点。