ABSTRACT

There have recently been novel applications of medical systematic review guidelines to economic policy interventions which contain controversial methodological assumptions that require further scrutiny. A landmark 2017 Cochrane review of unconditional cash transfer (UCT) studies, based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), exemplifies both the possibilities and limitations of applying medical systematic review guidelines to UCT and universal basic income (UBI) studies. Recognizing the need to upgrade GRADE to incorporate the differences between medical and policy interventions, the GRADE Public Health Project Group (PHPG) was convened to enumerate and address these methodological challenges. However, in light of our analysis of additional methodological challenges that arise for UCT and UBI studies, we argue that the adaptation of medical systematic review guidelines to economic methodology is far from straightforward and is in fact more challenging than claimed by the PHPG.

摘要

最近，医学系统审查指南在经济政策干预方面有了新的应用，其中包含有争议的方法论假设，需要进一步审查。2017 年，Cochrane 对无条件现金转移支付 (UCT) 研究进行了具有里程碑意义的审查，该审查基于建议评估、制定和评价分级 (GRADE)，举例说明了将医疗系统审查指南应用于 UCT 和全民基本收入 (UBI) 的可能性和局限性学习。认识到需要升级 GRADE 以纳入医疗和政策干预之间的差异，GRADE 公共卫生项目组 (PHPG) 被召集来列举和解决这些方法上的挑战。然而，根据我们对 UCT 和 UBI 研究中出现的其他方法学挑战的分析，