Epidemiol Rev. 2022 Jan 14;43(1):19-32. doi: 10.1093/epirev/mxab009.
Extensive empirical health research leverages variation in the timing and location of policy changes as quasi-experiments. Multiple social policies may be adopted simultaneously in the same locations, creating co-occurrence that must be addressed analytically for valid inferences. The pervasiveness and consequences of co-occurring policies have received limited attention. We analyzed a systematic sample of 13 social policy databases covering diverse domains including poverty, paid family leave, and tobacco use. We quantified policy co-occurrence in each database as the fraction of variation in each policy measure across different jurisdictions and times that could be explained by covariation with other policies. We used simulations to estimate the ratio of the variance of effect estimates under the observed policy co-occurrence to variance if policies were independent. Policy co-occurrence ranged from very high for state-level cannabis policies to low for country-level sexual minority-rights policies. For 65% of policies, greater than 90% of the place-time variation was explained by other policies. Policy co-occurrence increased the variance of effect estimates by a median of 57-fold. Co-occurring policies are common and pose a major methodological challenge to rigorously evaluating health effects of individual social policies. When uncontrolled, co-occurring policies confound one another, and when controlled, resulting positivity violations may substantially inflate the variance of estimated effects. Tools to enhance validity and precision for evaluating co-occurring policies are needed.
广泛的实证健康研究利用政策变化的时间和地点的变化作为准实验。多个社会政策可能在同一地点同时采用,这就产生了必须在分析上解决的共同发生,以便进行有效的推断。共同发生政策的普遍性和后果受到的关注有限。我们分析了一个涵盖贫困、带薪家庭假和烟草使用等不同领域的 13 个社会政策数据库的系统样本。我们将每个数据库中的政策共同发生量化为每个政策措施在不同司法管辖区和时间内的变化中,可以用其他政策的共变来解释的部分。我们使用模拟来估计在观察到的政策共同发生下效应估计值的方差与政策独立时的方差之比。政策共同发生的范围从州一级的大麻政策非常高到国家一级的性少数群体权利政策非常低。对于 65%的政策,超过 90%的地点-时间变化可以用其他政策来解释。政策共同发生使效应估计值的方差增加了中位数 57 倍。共同发生的政策很常见,对严格评估个别社会政策对健康的影响构成了重大方法学挑战。当未被控制时,共同发生的政策会相互混淆,而当被控制时,由此产生的阳性违反可能会大大增加估计效应的方差。需要工具来增强评估共同发生政策的有效性和精度。