Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 16, 2025

Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal
Published on: April 18, 2017
Interrupted Time Series for Assessing the Causality of Intervention Effects. Part 35 of a Series on Evaluating
Tim Mathes1, Dominik Röding, Constance Stegbauer
1Department for Medical Statistics, University Medical Center Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany; Hannover Medical School, Institute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health System Research. Germany; aQua-Institute for Applied Quality Improvement and Research in Health Care, Goettingen, Germany; Professorship of Public Health and Prevention, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich, Germany; Department of Global Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University; Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School (Theodor Fontane), Institute for Health Services and Health System Research, Germany; Center for Health Services Research, Brandenburg Medical School (Theodor Fontane), Germany.
Background:
The gold standard for evaluating interventions in medicine and health care is the randomized controlled trial (RCT). In practice, however, RCTs may be difficult to conduct because of high costs, ethical aspects, or practical considerations. This is particularly true of studies on the population level, e.g., for the evaluation of health policy measures.
Methods:
We present a type of study design called the interrupted time series (ITS) and its critical interpretation, with several illustrative examples. This discussion is based on selected meth - odological publications.
Results:
ITS are suitable for the assessment of interventions with a clear point of intervention (interruption). They are analyzed with the statistical methods of time-series analysis. One strength of ITS is that they can be used to estimate an immediate effect as well as a gradually developing effect. Under certain assumptions, the findings of an ITS analysis can be interpreted causally. The main assumption underlying an ITS is that the trend after the intervention would have been exactly the same as the trend before the intervention if the intervention had not taken place and all other conditions had remained unchanged. A further assumption is that there should be no differences in the pre- versus postintervention phases in the subjects or other entities being tested (e.g., hospitals) that might affect the measured endpoints (e.g., differences in mean age affecting measured mortality). Moreover, the intervention periods must be properly distinct from one another in order to prevent biased effect estimates. The robustness of the assumptions should also be checked with sensitivity analyses.
Conclusion:
As long as all sources of bias have been avoided and the findings are both plausible and robust, the effects revealed by ITS can be interpreted as causal. ITS may serve as an alternative method for evaluating intervention effects when an RCT cannot be performed.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Introduction To Survival Analysis
The primary goal of survival analysis is to estimate survival time—the time...
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Causality in Epidemiology
Censoring Survival Data
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - I

