Abstract
Background: Our main objective was to evaluate the fundamental biases detected in studies assessing the effects the Great Recession had on health for the case of Spain. As secondary objectives we presented methods to control these biases and to discuss the results of the studies in question if they had controlled for them. Methods: We carried out a systematic review of the literature published up to June 2018. We evaluated the biases that could have happened in all the eligible studies. Results: From the review, we finally selected 53 studies. Of the studies we reviewed, 60.38% or 32 out of 53, were evaluated as having a high risk of bias. The main biases our review revealed were problems with evaluation, time bias, lack of control of unobserved confounding, and non-exogeneity when defining the onset of the Great Recession. Conclusions: The results from the studies that controlled the biases were quite consistent. Summing up, the studies reviewed found that the Great Recession increased the risk of declaring poor self-rated health and the deterioration of mental health. Both the mortality rate and the suicide rate may well have increased after the Great Recession, probably after a three- to four-year delay.
Funder
Universitat de Girona
CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP)
Subject
Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Reference68 articles.
1. World Economic Outlook—April 2009: Crisis and Recovery,2009
2. Health outcomes during the 2008 financial crisis in Europe: systematic literature review
3. Quarterly National Accounts. Quarterly Growth Rates of Real GDP, Change over Previous Quarter
http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?QueryName=350&QueryType=View&Lang=en
4. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
5. Statistical issues in cost-effectiveness analysis;Mullahy,1996
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献