ArticleCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2013
Balancing efficiency, equity and feasibility of HIV treatment in South Africa - development of programmatic guidance.
Article in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Integrating social justice concerns into economic evaluation for healthcare and public health: A systematic review.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2018Pooled it
- Procedural fairness in benefit package design: inclusion of pre-exposure prophylaxis of HIV in Universal Coverage Scheme in Thailand.Health policy and planning · 2023Article
- Criteria for the procedural fairness of health financing decisions: a scoping review.Health policy and planning · 2023Article
- Procedural fairness in decision-making for financing a National Health Insurance Scheme: a case study from The Gambia.Health policy and planning · 2023Review
- Advancing the WHO-INTEGRATE Framework as a Tool for Evidence-Informed, Deliberative Decision-Making Processes: Exploring the Views of Developers and Users of WHO Guidelines.International journal of health policy and management · 2022Article
- Equity, justice, and social values in priority setting: a qualitative study of resource allocation criteria for global donor organizations working in low-income countries.International journal for equity in health · 2022Review
- Article
- WICID framework version 1.0: criteria and considerations to guide evidence-informed decision-making on non-pharmacological interventions targeting COVID-19.BMJ global health · 2020Article
- A systems perspective on the importance of global health strategy developments for accomplishing today's Sustainable Development Goals.Health policy and planning · 2019Review
- Criteria for prioritization of HIV programs in Viet Nam: a discrete choice experiment.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 10: operationalising disinvestment in a conceptual framework for resource allocation.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 6: investigating methods to identify, prioritise, implement and evaluate disinvestment projects in a local healthcare setting.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA): testing a proposed MCDA framework for orphan drugs.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2017Article
- Fair Processes for Priority Setting: Putting Theory into Practice Comment on "Expanded HTA: Enhancing Fairness and Legitimacy".International journal of health policy and management · 2017Article
- Priority Setting for Universal Health Coverage: We Need Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes, Not Just More Evidence on Cost-Effectiveness.International journal of health policy and management · 2016Article
- Equity in adherence to antiretroviral therapy among economically vulnerable adolescents living with HIV in Uganda.AIDS care · 2016Article
- The Effect of Antiretroviral Treatment on Health Care Utilization in Rural South Africa: A Population-Based Cohort Study.PloS one · 2016Article
- Towards an international taxonomy of integrated primary care: a Delphi consensus approach.BMC family practice · 2015Article
- IMPORTANCE OF MULTIPLE CRITERIA FOR PRIORITY SETTING OF HIV/AIDS INTERVENTIONS.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2015Article
- The accountability for reasonableness approach to guide priority setting in health systems within limited resources--findings from action research at district level in Kenya, Tanzania, and Zambia.Health research policy and systems · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
South Africa, the country with the largest HIV epidemic worldwide, has been scaling up treatment since 2003 and is rapidly expanding its eligibility criteria. The HIV treatment programme has achieved significant results, and had 1.8 million people on treatment per 2011. Despite these achievements, it is now facing major concerns regarding (i) efficiency: alternative treatment policies may save more lives for the same budget; (ii) equity: there are large inequalities in who receives treatment; (iii) feasibility: still only 52% of the eligible population receives treatment.Hence, decisions on the design of the present HIV treatment programme in South Africa can be considered suboptimal. We argue there are two fundamental reasons to this. First, while there is a rapidly growing evidence-base to guide priority setting decisions on HIV treatment, its included studies typically consider only one criterion at a time and thus fail to capture the broad range of values that stakeholders have. Second, priority setting on HIV treatment is a highly political process but it seems no adequate participatory processes are in place to incorporate stakeholders' views and evidences of all sorts.We propose an alternative approach that provides a better evidence base and outlines a fair policy process to improve priority setting in HIV treatment. The approach integrates two increasingly important frameworks on health care priority setting: accountability for reasonableness (A4R) to foster procedural fairness, and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to construct an evidence-base on the feasibility, efficiency, and equity of programme options including trade-offs. The approach provides programmatic guidance on the choice of treatment strategies at various decisions levels based on a sound conceptual framework, and holds large potential to improve HIV priority setting in South Africa.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.