Lindskog U, Lindskog P, Wall S
Scand J Soc Med. 1987;15(3):123-30. doi: 10.1177/140349488701500302.
There are several methodological problems related to evaluating the impact that improved water supply, sanitation and health education projects have on public health. Fifteen studies of intervention programmes, one by the present authors, are discussed. Since non-intervention studies of water supply are difficult to assess, a valid study design must include an intervention programme, even though such studies are more costly and time-consuming. Detailed descriptions of programmes, study plans, and analytical methods are often lacking, and different studies reach greatly diverging conclusions. It may be proposed that studies based on "weak" methodology give a more positive impression of improved public health after improvement of water supply than do before-after studies using comparison groups.
在评估改善供水、卫生设施及健康教育项目对公众健康的影响方面，存在若干方法学问题。本文讨论了包括作者本人所做的一项研究在内的15项干预项目研究。由于供水的非干预研究难以评估，即便此类研究成本更高且耗时更长，有效的研究设计也必须包含干预项目。项目、研究计划及分析方法的详细描述常常缺失，不同研究得出的结论差异极大。或许可以提出，基于“薄弱”方法学的研究相比使用对照组的前后对照研究，在供水改善后对公众健康改善的印象更为积极。
