Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21035839›Full record

ReviewLancet (London, England)2010

Costs and financial feasibility of malaria elimination.

Oliver Sabot, Justin M Cohen, Michelle S Hsiang, James G Kahn, Suprotik Basu, Linhua Tang, Bin Zheng, Qi Gao, Linda Zou, Allison Tatarsky and 6 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Lancet (London, England), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

62 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Achieving malaria elimination in China.The Lancet. Public health · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Oliver SabotClinton Health Access Initiative, Boston, MA 02127, USA. osabot@clintonhealthaccess.org
Justin M Cohen
Michelle S Hsiang
James G Kahn
Suprotik Basu
Linhua Tang
Bin Zheng
Qi Gao
Linda Zou
Allison Tatarsky
Shahina Aboobakar
Jennifer Usas
Scott Barrett
Jessica L Cohen
Dean T Jamison
Richard G A Feachem

Funding

UCSF CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCE INSTITUTEUL1RR024131 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI JOHNSTON, S. CLAIBORNE · 2006 to 2011
$111.2M
NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR024131NCRR NIH HHS UL1RR024131
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The marginal costs and benefits of converting malaria programmes from a control to an elimination goal are central to strategic decisions, but empirical evidence is scarce. We present a conceptual framework to assess the economics of elimination and analyse a central component of that framework-potential short-term to medium-term financial savings. After a review that showed a dearth of existing evidence, the net present value of elimination in five sites was calculated and compared with effective control. The probability that elimination would be cost-saving over 50 years ranged from 0% to 42%, with only one site achieving cost-savings in the base case. These findings show that financial savings should not be a primary rationale for elimination, but that elimination might still be a worthy investment if total benefits are sufficient to outweigh marginal costs. Robust research into these elimination benefits is urgently needed.

Indexed as

ChinaCost-Benefit AnalysisCost SavingsDemographyEswatiniHealth ExpendituresHumansMalariaMauritiusTanzania

Identifiers

PMID21035839
PMCPMC3044845

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.