Questioning the application of risk of bias tools in appraising evidence from natural experimental studies: critical reflections on Benton et al., IJBNPA 2016

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

Commentary

David K. Humphreys¹  David Ogilvie²  Jenna Panter² 

[1] Department of Social Policy and Intervention, University of Oxford, 32 Wellington Square, OX1 2ER, Oxford, UK;Green Templeton College, University of Oxford, 43 Woodstock Road, OX2 6HG, Oxford, UK;MRC Epidemiology Unit and Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), University of Cambridge, Box 285, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, CB2 0QQ, Cambridge, UK;

关键词: Natural experiments;    Built environment;    Physical activity;    Risk of bias;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12966-017-0500-4

 received in 2017-01-27, accepted in 2017-04-03,  发布年份 2017

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

We recently read the article by Benton et al. which reviewed risk of bias in natural experimental studies investigating the impact of the built environment on physical activity (Benton et al., 2016; Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 13:107). As a technical exercise in assessing risk of bias to understand study quality, we found the results of this study both interesting and potentially useful. However, it prompted a number of concerns with the use of risk of bias tools for assessing the quality of evidence from studies exploiting natural experiments. As we discuss in this commentary, the rigid application of such tools could have adverse effects on the uptake and use of natural experiments in population health research and practice.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© The Author(s). 2017