Program Evaluation of Population- and System-Level Policies: Evidence for Decision Making.


Journal

Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making
ISSN: 1552-681X
Titre abrégé: Med Decis Making
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8109073

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 2022
Historique:
pubmed: 28 5 2021
medline: 1 2 2022
entrez: 27 5 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Policy evaluations often focus on ex post estimation of causal effects on short-term surrogate outcomes. The value of such information is limited for decision making, as the failure to reflect policy-relevant outcomes and disregard for opportunity costs prohibits the assessment of value for money. Further, these evaluations do not always consider all relevant evidence, other courses of action, or decision uncertainty. In this article, we explore how policy evaluation could better meet the needs of decision making. We begin by defining the evidence required to inform decision making. We then conduct a literature review of challenges in evaluating policies. Finally, we highlight potential methods available to help address these challenges. The evidence required to inform decision making includes the impacts on the policy-relevant outcomes, the costs and associated opportunity costs, and the consequences of uncertainty. Challenges in evaluating health policies are described using 8 categories: 1) valuation space; 2) comparators; 3) time of evaluation; 4) mechanisms of action; 5) effects; 6) resources, constraints, and opportunity costs; 7) fidelity, adaptation, and level of implementation; and 8) generalizability and external validity. Methods from a broad set of disciplines are available to improve policy evaluation, relating to causal inference, decision-analytic modeling, theory of change, realist evaluation, and structured expert elicitation. The targeted review may not identify all possible challenges, and the methods covered are not exhaustive. Evaluations should provide appropriate evidence to inform decision making. There are challenges in evaluating policies, but methods from multiple disciplines are available to address these challenges. Evaluators need to carefully consider the decision being informed, the necessary evidence to inform it, and the appropriate methods.[Box: see text].

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Policy evaluations often focus on ex post estimation of causal effects on short-term surrogate outcomes. The value of such information is limited for decision making, as the failure to reflect policy-relevant outcomes and disregard for opportunity costs prohibits the assessment of value for money. Further, these evaluations do not always consider all relevant evidence, other courses of action, or decision uncertainty.
METHODS
In this article, we explore how policy evaluation could better meet the needs of decision making. We begin by defining the evidence required to inform decision making. We then conduct a literature review of challenges in evaluating policies. Finally, we highlight potential methods available to help address these challenges.
RESULTS
The evidence required to inform decision making includes the impacts on the policy-relevant outcomes, the costs and associated opportunity costs, and the consequences of uncertainty. Challenges in evaluating health policies are described using 8 categories: 1) valuation space; 2) comparators; 3) time of evaluation; 4) mechanisms of action; 5) effects; 6) resources, constraints, and opportunity costs; 7) fidelity, adaptation, and level of implementation; and 8) generalizability and external validity. Methods from a broad set of disciplines are available to improve policy evaluation, relating to causal inference, decision-analytic modeling, theory of change, realist evaluation, and structured expert elicitation.
LIMITATIONS
The targeted review may not identify all possible challenges, and the methods covered are not exhaustive.
CONCLUSIONS
Evaluations should provide appropriate evidence to inform decision making. There are challenges in evaluating policies, but methods from multiple disciplines are available to address these challenges.
IMPLICATIONS
Evaluators need to carefully consider the decision being informed, the necessary evidence to inform it, and the appropriate methods.[Box: see text].

Identifiants

pubmed: 34041992
doi: 10.1177/0272989X211016427
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

17-27

Subventions

Organisme : Department of Health
Pays : United Kingdom

Auteurs

Simon Walker (S)

Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK.

Aimee Fox (A)

Adelphi Values, Bollington, Cheshire, UK.

James Altunkaya (J)

Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK.

Tim Colbourn (T)

Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.

Mike Drummond (M)

Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK.

Susan Griffin (S)

Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK.

Nils Gutacker (N)

Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK.

Paul Revill (P)

Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK.

Mark Sculpher (M)

Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH