Office of Policy, Performance, and Evaluation, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia (Drs Pepin, St. Clair Sims, Khushalani, Kelly, Arifkhanova, Puddy, and Kaminski); Office of Public Health Law Services, National Center for State, Tribal, Local, and Territorial Public Health Infrastructure and Workforce, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia (Dr Hulkower); and Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE), Oak Ridge, Tennessee (Drs Tonti, Song, and Calhoun).
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2024;30(1):12-35. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000001833. Epub 2023 Oct 5.
Public health policy can play an important role in improving public health outcomes. Accordingly, there has been an increasing emphasis by policy makers on identifying and implementing evidence-informed public health policy interventions.
Growth and refinement of the field of research assessing the impact of legal interventions on health outcomes, known as legal epidemiology, prompted this review of studies on the relationship between laws and health or economic outcomes.
Authors systematically searched 8 major literature databases for all English language journal articles that assessed the effect of a law on health and economic outcomes published between January 1, 2009, and September 18, 2019. This search generated 12 570 unique articles 177 of which met inclusion criteria. The team conducting the systematic review was a multidisciplinary team that included health economists and public health policy researchers, as well as public health lawyers with expertise in legal epidemiological research methods. The authors identified and assessed the types of methods used to measure the laws' health impact.
In this review, the authors examine how legal epidemiological research methods have been described in the literature as well as trends among the studies. Overall, 3 major themes emerged from this study: (1) limited variability in the sources of the health data across the studies, (2) limited differences in the methodological approaches used to connect law to health outcomes, and (3) lack of transparency surrounding the source and quality of the legal data relied upon.
Through highlighting public health law research methodologies, this systematic review may inform researchers, practitioners, and lawmakers on how to better examine and understand the impacts of legal interventions on health and economic outcomes. Findings may serve as a source of suggested practices in conducting legal epidemiological outcomes research and identifying conceptual and method-related gaps in the literature.
公共卫生政策可以在改善公共卫生成果方面发挥重要作用。因此,政策制定者越来越强调确定和实施循证公共卫生政策干预措施。
评估法律干预对健康结果影响的研究领域(称为法律流行病学)的发展和完善,促使人们对法律与健康或经济结果之间关系的研究进行了回顾。
作者系统地在 8 个主要文献数据库中搜索了所有评估法律对健康和经济结果影响的英文期刊文章,这些文章发表于 2009 年 1 月 1 日至 2019 年 9 月 18 日之间。该搜索共产生了 12570 篇独特的文章,其中 177 篇符合纳入标准。进行系统评价的团队是一个多学科团队,包括卫生经济学家和公共卫生政策研究人员,以及具有法律流行病学研究方法专业知识的公共卫生律师。作者确定并评估了用于衡量法律对健康影响的方法类型。
在本综述中,作者检查了法律流行病学研究方法在文献中的描述方式以及研究中的趋势。总的来说,本研究出现了 3 个主要主题:(1)研究之间健康数据的来源变化有限,(2)将法律与健康结果联系起来的方法学方法使用差异有限,(3)围绕所依赖的法律数据来源和质量缺乏透明度。
通过突出公共卫生法律研究方法,本系统评价可以为研究人员、实践者和立法者提供信息,了解如何更好地检查和理解法律干预对健康和经济结果的影响。研究结果可以作为开展法律流行病学结果研究的建议做法的来源,并确定文献中概念和方法相关差距。