Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24115797›Full record

Trial reportBulletin of the World Health Organization2013

Economic evaluation of neonatal care packages in a cluster-randomized controlled trial in Sylhet, Bangladesh.

Amnesty E LeFevre, Samuel D Shillcutt, Hugh R Waters, Sabbir Haider, Shams El Arifeen, Ishtiaq Mannan, Habibur R Seraji, Rasheduzzaman Shah, Gary L Darmstadt, Steve N Wall and 5 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 7 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

15 authors.

Amnesty E LeFevreDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Suite E-8139, 615 North Wolfe Street, Baltimore MD 21205, United States of America (USA).
Samuel D Shillcutt
Hugh R Waters
Sabbir Haider
Shams El Arifeen
Ishtiaq Mannan
Habibur R Seraji
Rasheduzzaman Shah
Gary L Darmstadt
Steve N Wall
Emma K Williams
Robert E Black
Mathuram Santosham
Abdullah H Baqui
Projahnmo Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate and compare the cost-effectiveness of two strategies for neonatal care in Sylhet division, Bangladesh.

methodsIn a cluster-randomized controlled trial, two strategies for neonatal care--known as home care and community care--were compared with existing services. For each study arm, economic costs were estimated from a societal perspective, inclusive of programme costs, provider costs and household out-of-pocket payments on care-seeking. Neonatal mortality in each study arm was determined through household surveys. The incremental cost-effectiveness of each strategy--compared with that of the pre-existing levels of maternal and neonatal care--was then estimated. The levels of uncertainty in our estimates were quantified through probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

findingsThe incremental programme costs of implementing the home-care package were 2939 (95% confidence interval, CI: 1833-7616) United States dollars (US$) per neonatal death averted and US$ 103.49 (95% CI: 64.72-265.93) per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted. The corresponding total societal costs were US$ 2971 (95% CI: 1844-7628) and US$ 104.62 (95% CI: 65.15-266.60), respectively. The home-care package was cost-effective--with 95% certainty--if healthy life years were valued above US$ 214 per DALY averted. In contrast, implementation of the community-care strategy led to no reduction in neonatal mortality and did not appear to be cost-effective.

conclusionThe home-care package represents a highly cost-effective intervention strategy that should be considered for replication and scale-up in Bangladesh and similar settings elsewhere.

Indexed as

BangladeshConfidence IntervalsCost-Benefit AnalysisHealth Care SurveysHome Care ServicesHumansInfant MortalityInfant, NewbornNeonatal Nursing

Identifiers

PMID24115797
PMCPMC3791651

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.