Policy responses to COVID-19, particularly those related to non-pharmaceutical interventions, are unprecedented in scale and scope. Researchers and policymakers are striving to understand the impact of these policies on a variety of outcomes. Policy impact evaluations always 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 lags, lack of direct observation of key outcomes, and a multiplicity of interventions occurring on an accelerated time scale. In this paper, we (1) introduce the basic suite of policy impact evaluation designs for observational data, including cross-sectional analyses, pre/post, interrupted time-series, 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 a conceptual and graphical guide to identifying these key violations. The overall goal of this paper is to help policy-makers, journal editors, journalists, researchers, and other research consumers understand and weigh the strengths and limitations of evidence that is essential to decision-making.
翻译:对COVID-19的政策反应,特别是与非药物干预有关的政策反应,在规模和范围上都是前所未有的。研究人员和决策者正在努力了解这些政策对各种结果的影响。政策影响评估总是需要情况、研究设计、数据、统计和分析的复杂组合。除了对任何政策所面临的问题外,对COVID-19政策的评价由于传染病动态和滞后的额外挑战、缺乏对关键结果的直接观察以及加速时间尺度上发生的多种干预措施而变得复杂。本文(1) 介绍一套基本的观察数据政策影响评估设计,包括跨部门分析、前/后、中断的时间序列和差异分析,(2) 说明在COVID-19背景下这些设计所依据的要求和假设常常被违反的主要方式,(3) 向决策者和审查者提供概念和图表性指南,以确定这些关键违法行为。本文件的总目标是帮助决策者、编辑、记者、研究人员和其他研究消费者了解和权衡证据的强处和局限性,而这些证据对于作出决策至关重要。