• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

低收入和中等收入国家自助团体健康干预措施的经济评估:一项范围综述

Economic evaluation of self-help group interventions for health in LMICs: a scoping review.

作者信息

Ochalek Jessica, Gibbs Naomi K, Faria Rita, Darlong Joydeepa, Govindasamy Karthikeyan, Harden Melissa, Meka Anthony, Shrestha Dilip, Napit Indra Bahadur, Lilford Richard J, Sculpher Mark

机构信息

Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York YO10 5DD, United Kingdom.

Research, The Leprosy Mission Trust India, New Delhi 110001, India.

出版信息

Health Policy Plan. 2023 Oct 11;38(9):1033-1049. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czad060.

DOI:10.1093/heapol/czad060
PMID:37599510
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10566324/
Abstract

This scoping review aims to identify and critically appraise published economic evaluations of self-help group (SHG) interventions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) that seek to improve health and potentially also non-health outcomes. Through a systematic search of MEDLINE ALL (Ovid), EMBASE Ovid, PsychINFO, EconLit (Ovid) and Global Index Medicus, we identified studies published between 2014 and 2020 that were based in LMICs, included at least a health outcome, estimated intervention costs and reported the methods used. We critically analysed whether the methods employed can meaningfully inform decisions by ministries of health and other sectors, including donors, regarding whether to fund such interventions, and prioritized the aspects of evaluations that support decision-making and cross-sectoral decision-making especially. Nine studies met our inclusion criteria. Randomized controlled trials were the most commonly used vehicle to collect data and to establish a causal effect across studies. While all studies clearly stated one or more perspectives justifying the costs and effects that are reported, few papers clearly laid out the decision context or the decision maker(s) informed by the study. The latter is required to inform which costs, effects and opportunity costs are relevant to the decision and should be included in the analysis. Costs were typically reported from the provider or health-care sector perspective although other perspectives were also employed. Four papers reported outcomes in terms of a generic measure of health. Contrary to expectation, no studies reported outcomes beyond health. Our findings suggest limitations in the extent to which published studies are able to inform decision makers around the value of implementing SHG interventions in their particular context. Funders can make better informed decisions when evidence is presented using a cross-sectoral framework.

摘要

本综述旨在识别并批判性评价已发表的关于中低收入国家自助团体干预措施的经济评估,这些干预措施旨在改善健康状况,也可能改善非健康结果。通过系统检索MEDLINE ALL(Ovid)、EMBASE Ovid、PsychINFO、EconLit(Ovid)和Global Index Medicus,我们确定了2014年至2020年间发表的、以中低收入国家为背景、至少包括一项健康结果、估算了干预成本并报告了所用方法的研究。我们批判性地分析了所采用的方法是否能为卫生部和其他部门(包括捐助方)在是否资助此类干预措施方面的决策提供有意义的信息,并对评估中支持决策制定尤其是跨部门决策制定的方面进行了优先排序。九项研究符合我们的纳入标准。随机对照试验是各研究中最常用的数据收集和建立因果效应的手段。虽然所有研究都明确阐述了一个或多个证明所报告成本和效果合理性的观点,但很少有论文明确说明决策背景或该研究所告知的决策者。而后者对于明确哪些成本、效果和机会成本与决策相关并应纳入分析是必要的。成本通常是从提供者或医疗保健部门的角度报告的,不过也采用了其他角度。四篇论文以通用的健康指标报告了结果。与预期相反,没有研究报告健康以外的结果。我们的研究结果表明,已发表的研究在多大程度上能够为决策者提供关于在其特定背景下实施自助团体干预措施的价值的信息存在局限性。当使用跨部门框架呈现证据时,资助者可以做出更明智的决策。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ec12/10566324/9a4affddffaa/czad060f2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ec12/10566324/bee367ae918a/czad060f1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ec12/10566324/9a4affddffaa/czad060f2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ec12/10566324/bee367ae918a/czad060f1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ec12/10566324/9a4affddffaa/czad060f2.jpg

相似文献

1
Economic evaluation of self-help group interventions for health in LMICs: a scoping review.低收入和中等收入国家自助团体健康干预措施的经济评估:一项范围综述
Health Policy Plan. 2023 Oct 11;38(9):1033-1049. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czad060.
2
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
3
Cost-Effectiveness and Affordability of Interventions, Policies, and Platforms for the Prevention and Treatment of Mental, Neurological, and Substance Use Disorders预防和治疗精神、神经及物质使用障碍的干预措施、政策和平台的成本效益及可负担性
4
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.超越黑木树:影响澳大利亚地区、农村和偏远地区的健康研究问题的快速综述。
Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881.
5
The Effectiveness of Integrated Care Pathways for Adults and Children in Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review.综合护理路径在医疗环境中对成人和儿童的有效性:一项系统评价。
JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2009;7(3):80-129. doi: 10.11124/01938924-200907030-00001.
6
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
7
Economic evaluation of implementation science outcomes in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review.经济评估在中低收入国家实施科学成果:范围综述。
Implement Sci. 2022 Nov 16;17(1):76. doi: 10.1186/s13012-022-01248-x.
8
Interventions to reduce ambient particulate matter air pollution and their effect on health.减少环境细颗粒物空气污染的干预措施及其对健康的影响。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 May 20;5(5):CD010919. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010919.pub2.
9
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.为面临医疗治疗或筛查决策的人们提供的决策辅助工具。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Oct 5(10):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub3.
10
Generalisability in economic evaluation studies in healthcare: a review and case studies.医疗保健经济评估研究中的可推广性:综述与案例研究
Health Technol Assess. 2004 Dec;8(49):iii-iv, 1-192. doi: 10.3310/hta8490.

本文引用的文献

1
Estimating the Health Effects of Expansions in Health Expenditure in Indonesia: A Dynamic Panel Data Approach.估算印度尼西亚卫生支出扩张对健康的影响:动态面板数据方法。
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2022 Nov;20(6):881-891. doi: 10.1007/s40258-022-00752-x. Epub 2022 Oct 26.
2
Economic evaluation guidelines in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.经济评估指南在中低收入国家:系统评价。
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2021 Dec 21;38(1):e1. doi: 10.1017/S0266462321000659.
3
Estimating cost-effectiveness thresholds under a managed healthcare system: experiences from Colombia.
在管理式医疗保健系统下估算成本效益阈值:来自哥伦比亚的经验。
Health Policy Plan. 2022 Mar 4;37(3):359-368. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czab146.
4
Informing decisions with disparate stakeholders: cross-sector evaluation of cash transfers in Malawi.多利益攸关方决策信息:马拉维现金转移支付跨部门评估
Health Policy Plan. 2022 Jan 13;37(1):140-151. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czab137.
5
Avoiding Opportunity Cost Neglect in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Health Technology Assessment.在卫生技术评估的成本效益分析中避免机会成本忽视
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2022 Jan;20(1):13-18. doi: 10.1007/s40258-021-00679-9. Epub 2021 Sep 1.
6
Accounting for country- and time-specific values in the economic evaluation of health-related projects relevant to low- and middle-income countries.在对与中低收入国家相关的健康相关项目进行经济评估时,考虑国家和时间特异性价值。
Health Policy Plan. 2022 Jan 13;37(1):45-54. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czab104.
7
Economic evaluation of differentiated service delivery models for HIV treatment in Lesotho: costs to providers and patients.莱索托艾滋病毒治疗差异化服务提供模式的经济评价:提供者和患者的成本。
J Int AIDS Soc. 2021 Apr;24(4):e25692. doi: 10.1002/jia2.25692.
8
Cost-effectiveness analysis of an intimate partner violence prevention intervention targeting men, women and couples in rural Ethiopia: evidence from the Unite for a Better Life randomised controlled trial.针对埃塞俄比亚农村地区男性、女性和夫妻的亲密伴侣暴力预防干预措施的成本效益分析:来自“为美好生活而团结”随机对照试验的证据。
BMJ Open. 2021 Mar 29;11(3):e042365. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042365.
9
Community-based delivery of HIV treatment in Zambia: costs and outcomes.赞比亚的社区提供艾滋病毒治疗:成本和结果。
AIDS. 2021 Feb 2;35(2):299-306. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000002737.
10
Cost-effectiveness of a lifestyle intervention in high-risk individuals for diabetes in a low- and middle-income setting: Trial-based analysis of the Kerala Diabetes Prevention Program.在中低收入环境下,针对糖尿病高危人群的生活方式干预的成本效益:基于喀拉拉邦糖尿病预防计划的试验分析。
BMC Med. 2020 Sep 4;18(1):251. doi: 10.1186/s12916-020-01704-9.