Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23965222›Full record

ArticleGlobalization and health2013

Health technology assessments as a mechanism for increased value for money: recommendations to the Global Fund.

Yot Teerawattananon, Kate McQueston, Amanda Glassman, Jomkwan Yothasamut, Chaw Yin Myint

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Globalization and health, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Priority-setting, the Indian way.Journal of global health · 2018
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Allocation rules for global donors.Journal of health economics · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Priority-setting for achieving universal health coverage.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2016
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Yot TeerawattananonHealth Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP), Department of Health, Ministry of Public Health, 6th floor, 6th Building, Tiwanon Rd,, Nonthaburi 11000, Thailand. yot.t@hitap.net.
Kate McQueston
Amanda Glassman
Jomkwan Yothasamut
Chaw Yin Myint

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Global Fund is experiencing increased pressure to optimize results and improve its impact per dollar spent. It is also in transition from a provider of emergency funding, to a long-term, sustainable financing mechanism. This paper assesses the efficacy of current Global Fund investment and examines how health technology assessments (HTAs) can be used to provide guidance on the relative priority of health interventions currently subsidized by the Global Fund. In addition, this paper identifies areas where the application of HTAs can exert the greatest impact and proposes ways in which this tool could be incorporated, as a routine component, into application, decision, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation processes. Finally, it addresses the challenges facing the Global Fund in realizing the full potential of HTAs.

Indexed as

Financing, OrganizedGlobal HealthInternational CooperationTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalFinancial ManagementHIV InfectionsHumansMalariaTuberculosis

Identifiers

PMID23965222
PMCPMC3848836

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.