Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Problems with Evidence Assessment in COVID-19 Health Policy Impact Evaluation (PEACHPIE): A systematic review of evidence strength

View ORCID ProfileNoah A. Haber, Emma Clarke-Deelder, Avi Feller, Emily R. Smith, Joshua Salomon, Benjamin MacCormack-Gelles, Elizabeth M. Stone, Clara Bolster-Foucault, Jamie R. Daw, Laura A. Hatfield, Carrie E. Fry, Christopher B. Boyer, Eli Ben-Michael, Caroline M. Joyce, Beth S. Linas, Ian Schmid, Eric H. Au, Sarah E. Wieten, Brooke A Jarrett, Cathrine Axfors, Van Thu Nguyen, Beth Ann Griffin, Alyssa Bilinski, Elizabeth A. Stuart
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.21.21250243
Noah A. Haber
1Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Noah A. Haber
  • For correspondence: noahhaber@stanford.edu
Emma Clarke-Deelder
2Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Avi Feller
3Goldman School of Public Policy, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Emily R. Smith
4Department of Global Health, Milken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, D.C, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Joshua Salomon
5Center for Health Policy and Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Benjamin MacCormack-Gelles
2Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Elizabeth M. Stone
6Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Clara Bolster-Foucault
7Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jamie R. Daw
8Health Policy and Management, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, NY, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Laura A. Hatfield
9Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Carrie E. Fry
10Department of Health Policy, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christopher B. Boyer
11Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Eli Ben-Michael
12Institute for Quantitative Social Science, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Caroline M. Joyce
7Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Beth S. Linas
13Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
14Clinical Quality and Informatics, MITRE Corp, McLean, VA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ian Schmid
15Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Eric H. Au
16School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sarah E. Wieten
1Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Brooke A Jarrett
13Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cathrine Axfors
1Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Van Thu Nguyen
1Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Beth Ann Griffin
17RAND Corporation, Arlington, VA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alyssa Bilinski
18Interfaculty Initiative in Health Policy, Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Cambridge, MA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Elizabeth A. Stuart
15Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Introduction Assessing the impact of COVID-19 policy is critical for informing future policies. However, there are concerns about the overall strength of COVID-19 impact evaluation studies given the circumstances for evaluation and concerns about the publication environment. This study systematically reviewed the strength of evidence in the published COVID-19 policy impact evaluation literature.

Methods We included studies that were primarily designed to estimate the quantitative impact of one or more implemented COVID-19 policies on direct SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 outcomes. After searching PubMed for peer-reviewed articles published on November 26 or earlier and screening, all studies were reviewed by three reviewers first independently and then to consensus. The review tool was based on previously developed and release review guidance for COVID-19 policy impact evaluation, assessing what impact evaluation method was used, graphical display of outcomes data, functional form for the outcomes, timing between policy and impact, concurrent changes to the outcomes, and an overall rating.

Results After 102 articles were identified as potentially meeting inclusion criteria, we identified 36 published articles that evaluated the quantitative impact of COVID-19 policies on direct COVID-19 outcomes. The majority (n=23/36) of studies in our sample examined the impact of stay-at-home requirements. Nine studies were set aside because the study design was considered inappropriate for COVID-19 policy impact evaluation (n=8 pre/post; n=1 cross-section), and 27 articles were given a full consensus assessment. 20/27 met criteria for graphical display of data, 5/27 for functional form, 19/27 for timing between policy implementation and impact, and only 3/27 for concurrent changes to the outcomes. Only 1/27 studies passed all of the above checks, and 4/27 were rated as overall appropriate. Including the 9 studies set aside, reviewers found that only four of the 36 identified published and peer-reviewed health policy impact evaluation studies passed a set of key design checks for identifying the causal impact of policies on COVID-19 outcomes.

Discussion The reviewed literature directly evaluating the impact of COVID-19 policies largely failed to meet key design criteria for useful inference. This was largely driven by the circumstances under which policies were passed making it difficult to attribute changes in COVID-19 outcomes to particular policies. More reliable evidence review is needed to both identify and produce policy-actionable evidence, alongside the recognition that actionable evidence is often unlikely to be feasible.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

No funding was provided specifically for this research. Elizabeth Stone receives funding under the National Institutes of Health grant T32MH109436. Brooke Jarrett receives funding under the National Institutes of Health grant MH121128. Christopher Boyer receives funding under the National Institutes of Health grant T32HL098048 Cathrine Axfors receives funding from the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, grant KAW 2019.0561. Beth Ann Griffin and Elizabeth Stuart were supported by award number P50DA046351 from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Elizabeth Stuart was also supported by the Bloomberg American Health Initiative.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Not human subjects, no IRB approval needed

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

  • Minor language changes and corrections

Data Availability

Data, code, the review tool, and the review guidance are stored and available here: https://osf.io/9xmke/files/

https://osf.io/9xmke/files/

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted February 08, 2021.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Problems with Evidence Assessment in COVID-19 Health Policy Impact Evaluation (PEACHPIE): A systematic review of evidence strength
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Problems with Evidence Assessment in COVID-19 Health Policy Impact Evaluation (PEACHPIE): A systematic review of evidence strength
Noah A. Haber, Emma Clarke-Deelder, Avi Feller, Emily R. Smith, Joshua Salomon, Benjamin MacCormack-Gelles, Elizabeth M. Stone, Clara Bolster-Foucault, Jamie R. Daw, Laura A. Hatfield, Carrie E. Fry, Christopher B. Boyer, Eli Ben-Michael, Caroline M. Joyce, Beth S. Linas, Ian Schmid, Eric H. Au, Sarah E. Wieten, Brooke A Jarrett, Cathrine Axfors, Van Thu Nguyen, Beth Ann Griffin, Alyssa Bilinski, Elizabeth A. Stuart
medRxiv 2021.01.21.21250243; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.21.21250243
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Problems with Evidence Assessment in COVID-19 Health Policy Impact Evaluation (PEACHPIE): A systematic review of evidence strength
Noah A. Haber, Emma Clarke-Deelder, Avi Feller, Emily R. Smith, Joshua Salomon, Benjamin MacCormack-Gelles, Elizabeth M. Stone, Clara Bolster-Foucault, Jamie R. Daw, Laura A. Hatfield, Carrie E. Fry, Christopher B. Boyer, Eli Ben-Michael, Caroline M. Joyce, Beth S. Linas, Ian Schmid, Eric H. Au, Sarah E. Wieten, Brooke A Jarrett, Cathrine Axfors, Van Thu Nguyen, Beth Ann Griffin, Alyssa Bilinski, Elizabeth A. Stuart
medRxiv 2021.01.21.21250243; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.21.21250243

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Health Policy
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (174)
  • Allergy and Immunology (419)
  • Anesthesia (97)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (894)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (166)
  • Dermatology (101)
  • Emergency Medicine (257)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (404)
  • Epidemiology (8745)
  • Forensic Medicine (4)
  • Gastroenterology (403)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (1845)
  • Geriatric Medicine (175)
  • Health Economics (386)
  • Health Informatics (1282)
  • Health Policy (642)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (489)
  • Hematology (206)
  • HIV/AIDS (387)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (10521)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (564)
  • Medical Education (193)
  • Medical Ethics (52)
  • Nephrology (216)
  • Neurology (1744)
  • Nursing (100)
  • Nutrition (264)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (342)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (457)
  • Oncology (959)
  • Ophthalmology (279)
  • Orthopedics (107)
  • Otolaryngology (174)
  • Pain Medicine (117)
  • Palliative Medicine (41)
  • Pathology (262)
  • Pediatrics (553)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (264)
  • Primary Care Research (218)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (1836)
  • Public and Global Health (3963)
  • Radiology and Imaging (649)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (340)
  • Respiratory Medicine (532)
  • Rheumatology (214)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (178)
  • Sports Medicine (165)
  • Surgery (196)
  • Toxicology (37)
  • Transplantation (105)
  • Urology (78)