Although randomized control trials (RCTs) are the ‘gold standard’ to evaluate treatment effects in health care, they are frequently not practical, ethical or politically acceptable in the evaluation of many health system or public health interventions. In the absence of an RCT, evaluations often use quasi-experimental designs such as a pre-post study design with measurements before and after the intervention period, such as interupted time series (ITS). An ITS compares the intercept and slope of the regression line before the intervention with the intercept and slope after intervention. A one-time baseline effect of the intervention without influencing the secular trend can be detected as an intercept change. If the intervention changed the secular trend, there will also be a significant difference in the slope between the two periods. Use of ITS in biomedical research is described in more detail in an article published by Utz Pape and colleagues in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.
As part of a session on primary care data in the Health Informatics module on the Imperial Master of Public Health Programme, I asked students to work in two groups to present arguments for and against the NHS Care.Data programme. Care.Data is an NHS programme that will extract data from the medical records held by general practitioners (GPs) in England. The Care.Data programme takes advantage of the very high level of use of electronic medical records by GPs in England. After extraction, data will be uploaded to the NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC). The data will then be used for functions such as health care planning, monitoring disease patterns and research. The programme has been controversial with proponents arguing that the programme will bring many benefits for the NHS and the population of England; and opponents arguing it is a major breach of privacy. You can view the two presentations to help inform you further about these arguments: Arguments fo...
Comments