Our comprehensive review and meta- analysis of these experiments find suggestive evidence of health benefits associated with investments in early life , income support , and health insurance interventions .
Housing and neighborhood trials had no effect on the outcomes included in the meta-analyses .
A positive effect of the trial on its primary socioeconomic outcome was associated with higher odds of reporting health improvements .
Early life , income , and health insurance interventions have the potential to improve health .
Policy Points Social policies might not only improve economic well-being , but also health .
Health policy experts have therefore advocated for investments in social policies both to improve population health and potentially reduce health system costs .
Since the 1960s , a large number of social policies have been experimentally evaluated in the United States .
Some of these experiments include health outcomes , providing a unique opportunity to inform evidence -based policymaking .
CONTEXT Insurers and health care providers are investing heavily in nonmedical social interventions in an effort to improve health and potentially reduce health care costs .
Trials and tribulations: cross-learning from the practices of epidemiologists and economists in the evaluation of public health interventions
Abstract The r and omized controlled trial is commonly used by both epidemiologists and economists to test the effectiveness of public health interventions . Yet we have noticed differences in practice between the two disciplines . In this article , we propose that there are some underlying differences between the disciplines in the way trials are used , how they are conducted and how results from trials are reported and disseminated . We hypothesize that evidence -based public health could be strengthened by underst and ing these differences , harvesting best- practice across the disciplines and breaking down communication barriers between economists and epidemiologists who conduct trials of public health interventions
Our comprehensive review and meta- analysis of these experiments find suggestive evidence of health benefits associated with investments in early life , income support , and health insurance interventions .
Housing and neighborhood trials had no effect on the outcomes included in the meta-analyses .
A positive effect of the trial on its primary socioeconomic outcome was associated with higher odds of reporting health improvements .
Early life , income , and health insurance interventions have the potential to improve health .
Policy Points Social policies might not only improve economic well-being , but also health .
Health policy experts have therefore advocated for investments in social policies both to improve population health and potentially reduce health system costs .
Since the 1960s , a large number of social policies have been experimentally evaluated in the United States .
Some of these experiments include health outcomes , providing a unique opportunity to inform evidence -based policymaking .
CONTEXT Insurers and health care providers are investing heavily in nonmedical social interventions in an effort to improve health and potentially reduce health care costs .