Show simple item record

Challenges to validity in single‐group interrupted time series analysis

dc.contributor.authorLinden, Ariel
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-14T15:10:50Z
dc.date.available2018-05-15T21:02:51Zen
dc.date.issued2017-04
dc.identifier.citationLinden, Ariel (2017). "Challenges to validity in single‐group interrupted time series analysis." Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 23(2): 413-418.
dc.identifier.issn1356-1294
dc.identifier.issn1365-2753
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/136442
dc.description.abstractRationale, aims and objectivesSingle‐group interrupted time series analysis (ITSA) is a popular evaluation methodology in which a single unit of observation is studied; the outcome variable is serially ordered as a time series, and the intervention is expected to “interrupt” the level and/or trend of the time series, subsequent to its introduction. The most common threat to validity is history—the possibility that some other event caused the observed effect in the time series. Although history limits the ability to draw causal inferences from single ITSA models, it can be controlled for by using a comparable control group to serve as the counterfactual.MethodTime series data from 2 natural experiments (effect of Florida’s 2000 repeal of its motorcycle helmet law on motorcycle fatalities and California’s 1988 Proposition 99 to reduce cigarette sales) are used to illustrate how history biases results of single‐group ITSA results—as opposed to when that group’s results are contrasted to those of a comparable control group.ResultsIn the first example, an external event occurring at the same time as the helmet repeal appeared to be the cause of a rise in motorcycle deaths, but was only revealed when Florida was contrasted with comparable control states. Conversely, in the second example, a decreasing trend in cigarette sales prior to the intervention raised question about a treatment effect attributed to Proposition 99, but was reinforced when California was contrasted with comparable control states.ConclusionsResults of single‐group ITSA should be considered preliminary, and interpreted with caution, until a more robust study design can be implemented.
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.publisherRand McNally
dc.subject.otherinterrupted time series analysis
dc.subject.othercausal inference
dc.subject.otherquasi‐experimental
dc.titleChallenges to validity in single‐group interrupted time series analysis
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelMedicine (General)
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/136442/1/jep12638_am.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/136442/2/jep12638.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/jep.12638
dc.identifier.sourceJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBreslow L, Johnson M. California’s Proposition 99 on tobacco, and its impact. Annu Rev Public Health. 1993; 14: 585 – 604.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHotz GA, Cohn SM, Popkin C, et al. The impact of a repealed motorcycle helmet law in Miami‐Dade County. J Trauma. 2002; 52: 469 – 474.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMuller A. Florida’s motorcycle helmet law repeal and fatality rates. Am J Public Health. 2004; 94: 556 – 558.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTurner P, Hagelin C, Chu X, Greenman M, Read J, West M. Florida Motorcycle Helmet Use Observational Survey and Trend Analysis. Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida. 2004.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKyrychenko SY, McCartt AT. Florida’s weakened motorcycle helmet law: effects on death rates in motorcycle crashes. Traffic Inj Prev. 2006; 7: 55 – 60.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceU.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, National Center for Statistics and Analysis. Fatality analysis reporting system (FARS). Available at: ftp://ftp.nhtsa.dot.gov/fars/ Accessed July 5, 2016.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceU.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. Highway statistics (multiple years). Available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics.cfm Accessed July 5, 2016.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYarnold PR, Linden A. Using machine learning to model dose–response relationships via ODA: eliminating response variable baseline variation by ipsative standardization. Optim Data Anal. 2016; 5: 41 – 52.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSiegel M. The effectiveness of state‐level tobacco control interventions: a review of program implementation and behavioral outcomes. Annu Rev Public Health. 2002; 23: 45 – 71.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGlantz S. Changes in cigarette consumption, prices, and tobacco industry revenues associated with California’s Proposition 99. Tob Control. 1993; 2: 311 – 314.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFichtenberg C, Glantz S. Association of the California tobacco control program with declines in cigarette consumption and mortality from heart disease. N Engl J Med. 2000; 343: 1772 – 1777.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAbadie A, Diamond A, Hainmueller J. Synthetic control methods for comparative case studies: estimating the effect of California’s tobacco control program. J Am Stat Assoc. 2010; 105: 493 – 505.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAbadie A, Diamond A, Hainmueller J. SYNTH: Stata module to implement synthetic control methods for comparative case studies. Statistical Software Components S457334, Department of Economics, Boston College. 2014. Available from: https://ideas.repec.org/c/boc/bocode/s457334.html
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOrzechowski W, Walker RC. The Tax Burden on Tobacco. Historical Compilation, vol. 40. Arlington, VA: Orzechowski & Walker; 2005.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLinden A, Adams JL. Evaluating health management programmes over time. Application of propensity score‐based weighting to longitudinal data. J Eval Clin Pract. 2010; 16: 180 – 185.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRobins JM, Hernán MA, Brumback B. Marginal structural models and causal inference in epidemiology. Epidemiology. 2000; 11: 550 – 560.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLinden A, Adams J, Roberts N. Evaluating disease management program effectiveness: an introduction to survival analysis. Dis Manag. 2004; 7: 180 – 190.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBarlow DH, Hayes SC, Nelson RO. The Scientist Practitioner: Research and Accountability in Clinical and Educational Settings. New York: Pergamon Press; 1984.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSimonton DK. Cross‐sectional time‐series experiments: some suggested statistical analyses. Psychol Bull. 1977; 84: 489 – 502.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVelicer WF, McDonald RP. Cross‐sectional time series designs: a general transformation approach. Multivar Behav Res. 1991; 26: 247 – 254.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLinden A, Yarnold PR. Using machine learning to identify structural breaks in single‐group interrupted time series designs. J Eval Clin Pract. DOI: 10.1111/jep.12544.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCampbell DT, Stanley JC. Experimental and Quasi‐experimental Designs for Research. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally; 1966.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceShadish WR, Cook TD, Campbell DT. Experimental and Quasi‐experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin; 2002.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLinden A. Estimating the effect of regression to the mean in health management programs. Dis Manag Health Outcomes. 2007; 15: 7 – 12.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLinden A. Assessing regression to the mean effects in health care initiatives. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013; 13: 1 – 7.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLinden A, Adams J, Roberts N. The generalizability of disease management program results: getting from here to there. Manag Care Interface. 2004; 17: 38 – 45.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBiglan A, Ary D, Wagenaar AC. The value of interrupted time‐series experiments for community intervention research. Prev Sci. 2000; 1: 31 – 49.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGillings D, Makuc D, Siegel E. Analysis of interrupted time series mortality trends: an example to evaluate regionalized perinatal care. Am J Public Health. 1981; 71: 38 – 46.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMuller A. Florida’s motorcycle helmet law repeal and fatality rates. Am J Public Health. 2004; 94: 556 – 558.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBriesacher BA, Soumerai SB, Zhang F, et al. A critical review of methods to evaluate the impact of FDA regulatory actions. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2013; 22: 986 – 994.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRamsay CR, Matowe L, Grilli R, Grimshaw JM, Thomas RE. Interrupted time series designs in health technology assessment: lessons from two systematic reviews of behavior change strategies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2003; 19: 613 – 623.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRiley WT, Glasgow RE, Etheredge L, Abernethy AP. Rapid, responsive, relevant (R3) research: a call for a rapid learning health research enterprise. Clin Transl Med. 2013; 2: 1 – 6.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEffective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC). Interrupted time series (ITS) analyses. 2015. EPOC Resources for review authors. Oslo: Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services. Available at: http://epoc.cochrane.org/epoc‐specific‐resources‐review‐authors
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRubin DB. Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. J Educ Psychol. 1974; 66: 688 – 701.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRubin DB. Causal inference using potential outcomes: design, modeling, decisions. J Am Stat Assoc. 2005; 100: 322 – 331.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBox GEP, Tiao GC. Intervention analysis with applications to economic and environmental problems. J Am Stat Assoc. 1975; 70: 70 – 79.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGlass GV, Willson VL, Gottman JM. Design and Analysis of Time‐series Experiments. Boulder: University of Colorado Press; 1975.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcDowall D, McCleary R, Meidinger EE, Hay RA. Interrupted Time Series Analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.; 1980.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCrosbie J. Interrupted time‐series analysis with brief single‐subject data. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1993; 61: 966 – 974.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGottman JM. Time‐series analysis. A Comprehensive Introduction for Social Scientists. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1981.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLinden A, Adams JL. Applying a propensity‐score based weighting model to interrupted time series data: Improving causal inference in program evaluation. J Eval Clin Pract. 2011; 17: 1231 – 1238.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLinden A. Conducting interrupted time‐series analysis for single‐ and multiple‐group comparisons. The Stata J. 2015; 15: 480 – 500.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcKnight S, McKean JW, Huitema BE. A double bootstrap method to analyze linear models with autoregressive error terms. Psychol Methods. 2000; 5: 87 – 101.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe its collections in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in them. We encourage you to Contact Us anonymously if you encounter harmful or problematic language in catalog records or finding aids. More information about our policies and practices is available at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.