ArticleHealth research policy and systems2014
Advancing the application of systems thinking in health: why cure crowds out prevention.
Article in Health research policy and systems, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Systems science and systems thinking for public health: a systematic review of the field.BMJ open · 2015Pooled it
- The Astronomy of Africa's Health Systems Literature During the MDG Era: Where Are the Systems Clusters?Global health, science and practice · 2015Pooled it
- Leveraging blue spaces for public health: Co-creating a whole-system action plan.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Planning, implementing and governing systems-based co-creation: the DISCOVER framework.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- A Systems-Based Framework for Immunisation System Design: Six Loops, Three Flows, Two Paradigms.Health systems (Basingstoke, England) · 2023Article
- Does correlation heuristic dependence reduce due to classroom teaching? A case study from India.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Parity of esteem and systems thinking: a theory informed qualitative inductive thematic analysis.BMC psychiatry · 2022Article
- Methods used in microbial forensics and epidemiological investigations for stronger health systems.Forensic sciences research · 2022Review
- Advancing sustainable development goals through immunization: a literature review.Globalization and health · 2021Review
- Article
- Bringing a health systems modelling approach to complex evaluations: multicountry applications in HIV, TB and malaria.BMJ global health · 2020Article
- Predictors of visit frequency for patients using ongoing chiropractic care for chronic low back and chronic neck pain; analysis of observational data.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2020Observational
- Prevalence and Characteristics of Chronic Spinal Pain Patients with Different Hopes (Treatment Goals) for Ongoing Chiropractic Care.Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.) · 2019Observational
- Health system modelling research: towards a whole-health-system perspective for identifying good value for money investments in health system strengthening.BMJ global health · 2019Review
- Article
- The application of systems thinking in health: why use systems thinking?Health research policy and systems · 2014Article
- Advancing the application of systems thinking in health.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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThis paper presents a system dynamics computer simulation model to illustrate unintended consequences of apparently rational allocations to curative and preventive services.
methodsA modeled population is subject to only two diseases. Disease A is a curable disease that can be shortened by curative care. Disease B is an instantly fatal but preventable disease. Curative care workers are financed by public spending and private fees to cure disease A. Non-personal, preventive services are delivered by public health workers supported solely by public spending to prevent disease B. Each type of worker tries to tilt the balance of government spending towards their interests. Their influence on the government is proportional to their accumulated revenue.
resultsThe model demonstrates effects on lost disability-adjusted life years and costs over the course of several epidemics of each disease. Policy interventions are tested including: i) an outside donor rationally donates extra money to each type of disease precisely in proportion to the size of epidemics of each disease; ii) lobbying is eliminated; iii) fees for personal health services are eliminated; iv) the government continually rebalances the funding for prevention by ring-fencing it to protect it from lobbying.The model exhibits a "spend more get less" equilibrium in which higher revenue by the curative sector is used to influence government allocations away from prevention towards cure. Spending more on curing disease A leads paradoxically to a higher overall disease burden of unprevented cases of disease B. This paradoxical behavior of the model can be stopped by eliminating lobbying, eliminating fees for curative services, and ring-fencing public health funding.
conclusionsWe have created an artificial system as a laboratory to gain insights about the trade-offs between curative and preventive health allocations, and the effect of indicative policy interventions. The underlying dynamics of this artificial system resemble features of modern health systems where a self-perpetuating industry has grown up around disease-specific curative programs like HIV/AIDS or malaria. The model shows how the growth of curative care services can crowd both fiscal and policy space for the practice of population level prevention work, requiring dramatic interventions to overcome these trends.
Indexed as
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.