IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/wbrobs/v36y2021i1p101-130..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Replication Redux: The Reproducibility Crisis and the Case of Deworming
[Economics of Mass Deworming Programs]

Author

Listed:
  • Owen Ozier

Abstract

In 2004, a landmark study showed that an inexpensive medication to treat parasitic worms could improve health and school attendance for millions of children in many developing countries. Eleven years later, a headline in The Guardian reported that this treatment, deworming, had been “debunked.” The pronouncement followed an effort to replicate and re-analyze the original study, as well as an update to a systematic review of the effects of deworming. This story made waves amidst discussion of a reproducibility crisis in some of the social sciences. In this paper, I explore what it means to “replicate” and “reanalyze” a study, both in general and in the specific case of deworming. I review the broader replication efforts in economics, then examine the key findings of the original deworming paper in light of the “replication,” “reanalysis,” and “systematic review.” I also discuss the nature of the link between this single paper's findings, other papers’ findings, and any policy recommendations about deworming. Through this example, I provide a perspective on the ways replication and reanalysis work, the strengths and weaknesses of systematic reviews, and whether there is, in fact, a reproducibility crisis in economics.

Suggested Citation

  • Owen Ozier, 2021. "Replication Redux: The Reproducibility Crisis and the Case of Deworming [Economics of Mass Deworming Programs]," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 36(1), pages 101-130.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:wbrobs:v:36:y:2021:i:1:p:101-130.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/wbro/lkaa005
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David K. Evans & Anna Popova, 2016. "What Really Works to Improve Learning in Developing Countries? An Analysis of Divergent Findings in Systematic Reviews," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 31(2), pages 242-270.
    2. Michael A. Clemens, 2017. "The Meaning Of Failed Replications: A Review And Proposal," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 326-342, February.
    3. Benjamin A. Olken, 2015. "Promises and Perils of Pre-analysis Plans," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(3), pages 61-80, Summer.
    4. Croke,Kevin & Hicks,Joan Hamory & Hsu,Eric & Kremer,Michael Robert & Miguel,Edward A., 2016. "Does mass deworming affect child nutrition ? meta-analysis, cost-effectiveness, and statistical power," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7921, The World Bank.
    5. Sarah Baird & Joan Hamory Hicks & Michael Kremer & Edward Miguel, 2016. "Worms at Work: Long-run Impacts of a Child Health Investment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 131(4), pages 1637-1680.
    6. Kremer, Michael & Glennerster, Rachel, 2011. "Improving Health in Developing Countries," Handbook of Health Economics, in: Mark V. Pauly & Thomas G. Mcguire & Pedro P. Barros (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 201-315, Elsevier.
    7. Jörg Peters & Jörg Langbein & Gareth Roberts, 2018. "Generalization in the Tropics – Development Policy, Randomized Controlled Trials, and External Validity," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 33(1), pages 34-64.
    8. Edward Miguel & Michael Kremer, 2004. "Worms: Identifying Impacts on Education and Health in the Presence of Treatment Externalities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(1), pages 159-217, January.
    9. Lucas C. Coffman & Muriel Niederle, 2015. "Pre-analysis Plans Have Limited Upside, Especially Where Replications Are Feasible," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(3), pages 81-98, Summer.
    10. Hoyt Bleakley, 2007. "Disease and Development: Evidence from Hookworm Eradication in the American South," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(1), pages 73-117.
    11. Fafchamps, Marcel & Labonne, Julien, 2017. "Using Split Samples to Improve Inference on Causal Effects," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(4), pages 465-482, October.
    12. Kenneth F Schulz & Douglas G Altman & David Moher & for the CONSORT Group, 2010. "CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group Randomised Trials," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(3), pages 1-7, March.
    13. Rachel Glennerster & Kudzai Takavarasha, 2013. "Running Randomized Evaluations: A Practical Guide," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 10085.
    14. Owen Ozier, 2018. "Exploiting Externalities to Estimate the Long-Term Effects of Early Childhood Deworming," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(3), pages 235-262, July.
    15. Hunt Allcott, 2015. "Site Selection Bias in Program Evaluation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(3), pages 1117-1165.
    16. Colin F. Camerer & Anna Dreber & Felix Holzmeister & Teck-Hua Ho & Jürgen Huber & Magnus Johannesson & Michael Kirchler & Gideon Nave & Brian A. Nosek & Thomas Pfeiffer & Adam Altmejd & Nick Buttrick , 2018. "Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 2(9), pages 637-644, September.
    17. T. D. Stanley, 2001. "Wheat from Chaff: Meta-analysis as Quantitative Literature Review," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 131-150, Summer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ankel-Peters, Jörg & Fiala, Nathan & Neubauer, Florian, 2023. "Do economists replicate?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 219-232.
    2. Ankel-Peters, Jörg & Schmidt, Christoph M., 2023. "Rural electrification, the credibility revolution, and the limits of evidence-based policy," Ruhr Economic Papers 1051, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maurizio Canavari & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2018. "How to run an experimental auction: A review of recent advances," Working Papers 2018-5, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    2. Eszter Czibor & David Jimenez‐Gomez & John A. List, 2019. "The Dozen Things Experimental Economists Should Do (More of)," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(2), pages 371-432, October.
    3. Pascaline Dupas & Edward Miguel, 2016. "Impacts and Determinants of Health Levels in Low-Income Countries," NBER Working Papers 22235, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Amrita Ahuja & Sarah Baird & Joan Hamory Hicks & Michael Kremer & Edward Miguel & Shawn Powers, 2015. "When Should Governments Subsidize Health? The Case of Mass Deworming," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 29(suppl_1), pages 9-24.
    5. Josephson, Anna & Michler, Jeffrey D., 2018. "Viewpoint: Beasts of the field? Ethics in agricultural and applied economics," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1-11.
    6. Joan Hamory & Edward Miguel & Michael W. Walker & Michael Kremer & Sarah J. Baird, 2020. "Twenty Year Economic Impacts of Deworming," NBER Working Papers 27611, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Garret Christensen & Edward Miguel, 2018. "Transparency, Reproducibility, and the Credibility of Economics Research," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 56(3), pages 920-980, September.
    8. Susan Athey & Guido Imbens, 2016. "The Econometrics of Randomized Experiments," Papers 1607.00698, arXiv.org.
    9. Alex Eble & Peter Boone & Diana Elbourne, 2017. "On Minimizing the Risk of Bias in Randomized Controlled Trials in Economics," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 31(3), pages 687-707.
    10. Bruno Ferman & Cristine Pinto & Vitor Possebom, 2020. "Cherry Picking with Synthetic Controls," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(2), pages 510-532, March.
    11. Pedro Carneiro & Sokbae Lee & Daniel Wilhelm, 2020. "Optimal data collection for randomized control trials [Microcredit impacts: Evidence from a randomized microcredit program placement experiment by Compartamos Banco]," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 23(1), pages 1-31.
    12. Jacobus de Hoop & Jed Friedman & Eeshani Kandpal & Furio C. Rosati, 2019. "Child Schooling and Child Work in the Presence of a Partial Education Subsidy," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 54(2), pages 503-531.
    13. Kevin Croke & Joan Hamory Hicks & Eric Hsu & Michael Kremer & Ricardo Maertens & Edward Miguel & Witold Więcek, 2016. "Meta-Analysis and Public Policy: Reconciling the Evidence on Deworming," NBER Working Papers 22382, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Bloom, David E. & Canning, David & Kotschy, Rainer & Prettner, Klaus & Schünemann, Johannes, 2024. "Health and economic growth: Reconciling the micro and macro evidence," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    15. Roman Horvath & Ali Elminejad & Tomas Havranek, 2020. "Publication and Identification Biases in Measuring the Intertemporal Substitution of Labor Supply," Working Papers IES 2020/32, Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, Institute of Economic Studies, revised Sep 2020.
    16. Jörg Peters & Jörg Langbein & Gareth Roberts, 2018. "Generalization in the Tropics – Development Policy, Randomized Controlled Trials, and External Validity," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 33(1), pages 34-64.
    17. Isaiah Andrews & Maximilian Kasy, 2019. "Identification of and Correction for Publication Bias," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(8), pages 2766-2794, August.
    18. Kevin Croke & Joan Hamory Hicks & Eric Hsu & Michael Kremer & Edward Miguel, 2017. "Should the WHO withdraw support for mass deworming?," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-3, June.
    19. Douglas Almond & Janet Currie & Valentina Duque, 2018. "Childhood Circumstances and Adult Outcomes: Act II," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 56(4), pages 1360-1446, December.
    20. Meredith, Jennifer & Robinson, Jonathan & Walker, Sarah & Wydick, Bruce, 2013. "Keeping the doctor away: Experimental evidence on investment in preventative health products," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 196-210.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:wbrobs:v:36:y:2021:i:1:p:101-130.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wrldbus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.