Suppr超能文献

将公平性纳入公共卫生政策的经济分析中:系统评价及未来方向。

Inclusion of equity in economic analyses of public health policies: systematic review and future directions.

机构信息

Deakin Health Economics, Centre for Population Health Research, Deakin University, Victoria.

Global Obesity Centre (GLOBE), Centre for Population Health Research, Deakin University, Victoria.

出版信息

Aust N Z J Public Health. 2018 Apr;42(2):207-213. doi: 10.1111/1753-6405.12709. Epub 2017 Sep 12.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To assess current approaches to inclusion of equity in economic analysis of public health interventions and to recommend best approaches and future directions.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of studies that have used socioeconomic position (SEP) in cost-effectiveness analyses. Studies were identified using MedLine, EconLit and HEED and were evaluated based on their SEP specific inputs and methods of quantification of the health and financial inequalities.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine relevant studies were identified. The majority of studies comparing two or more interventions left interpretation of the size of the health and financial inequality differences to the reader. Newer approaches include: i) use of health inequality measures to quantify health inequalities; ii) inclusion of financial impacts, such as out-of-pocket expenditures; and iii) use of equity weights. The challenge with these approaches is presenting results that policy makers can easily interpret.

CONCLUSIONS

Using CEA techniques to generate new information about the health equity implications of alternative policy options has not been widely used, but should be considered to inform future decision making. Implications for public health: Inclusion of equity in economic analysis would facilitate a more nuanced comparison of interventions in relation to efficiency, equity and financial impact.

摘要

目的

评估当前将公平性纳入公共卫生干预经济分析的方法,并为最佳方法和未来方向提供建议。

方法

我们对使用社会经济地位(SEP)进行成本效益分析的研究进行了系统综述。使用 MedLine、EconLit 和 HEED 检索研究,并根据其 SEP 特定投入和量化健康和金融不平等的方法进行评估。

结果

确定了 29 项相关研究。大多数比较两种或多种干预措施的研究将健康和金融不平等差异的大小留给读者解释。较新的方法包括:i)使用健康不平等衡量标准来量化健康不平等;ii)纳入财务影响,如自付支出;以及 iii)使用公平权重。这些方法的挑战在于提出决策者可以轻松解释的结果。

结论

使用 CEA 技术生成有关替代政策选项对健康公平影响的新信息尚未得到广泛应用,但应考虑将其用于为未来的决策提供信息。对公共卫生的影响:将公平性纳入经济分析将有助于更细致地比较干预措施在效率、公平和财务影响方面的差异。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验