Does selective migration bias the health impact assessment of urban regeneration programmes in cross-sectional studies? Findings from a Dutch case study

We examined if the assessment of the health impact of a national Dutch regeneration programme depends on using either a repeated cross-sectional or longitudinal study design. This is important as only the latter design can incorporate migration patterns. For both designs, we compared trends in medic...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Health & place 2019-01, Vol.55, p.155-164
Main Authors: Ruijsbroek, Annemarie, Wong, Albert, van den Brink, Carolien, Droomers, Mariël, van Oers, Hans A.M., Stronks, Karien, Kunst, Anton E.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Bias
Correlation analysis
Cross-sectional studies
Design
Drugs
Evaluation, Longitudinal design
Health
Health impact assessment
Health technology assessment
Migration
Population health intervention
Repeated cross-sectional design
Selective migration
Trends
Urban regeneration
Urban renewal
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:We examined if the assessment of the health impact of a national Dutch regeneration programme depends on using either a repeated cross-sectional or longitudinal study design. This is important as only the latter design can incorporate migration patterns. For both designs, we compared trends in medication use between target and control districts. We found differences in medication use trends to be modest under the longitudinal design, and not demonstrable under the repeated cross-sectional design. The observed differences were hardly influenced by migration patterns. We conclude that in the Netherlands migration patterns had little effect on the health impact assessment of this national urban regeneration programme, so either the cross-sectional or longitudinal evaluation study design will do. •Most health evaluations of urban regeneration programmes use a repeated cross-sectional study design.•This design cannot examine the impact of residential migration on the health assessment. A longitudinal design can.•We examined if different study designs influence the health impact assessment of a Dutch urban regeneration programme.•There were only slight differences in effect estimates between a repeated-cross sectional and longitudinal design.•Residential migration hardly influenced the results, suggesting that repeated cross-sectional study designs can be used.
ISSN:1353-8292
1873-2054
DOI:10.1016/j.healthplace.2018.11.007