Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25214612›Full record

ArticleScience (New York, N.Y.)2014

Getting essential health products to their end users: subsidize, but how much?

Pascaline Dupas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science (New York, N.Y.), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Bridging the Efficacy-Effectiveness Gap in HIV Programs: Lessons From Economics.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2019
    Review
  12. Assessing the Demand for Plastic Latrine Slabs in Rural Kenya.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2019
    Article
  13. Scaling up sanitation: Evidence from an RCT in Indonesia.Journal of development economics · 2019
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

1 author.

Pascaline DupasDepartment of Economics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.

Funding

Maternal and Child Health in Poor Countries: Evidence from Randomized EvaluationsP01HD061315 · NICHD · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI DUFLO, ESTHER · 2010 to 2014
$4.1M
NICHD NIH HHS P01 HD061315NICHD NIH HHS P01HD061315-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although coverage rates and health outcomes are improving, many poor people around the world still do not benefit from essential health products. An estimated two-thirds of child deaths could be prevented with increased coverage of products such as vaccines, point-of-use water treatment, iron fortification, and insecticide-treated bednets. What limits the flow of products from the producer's laboratory bench to the end users, and what can be done about it? Recent empirical research suggests a crucial role for heavy subsidies.

Indexed as

Financing, GovernmentHealthHousehold ProductsHumansMalariaMicropore FiltersMosquito NetsProtective Devices

Identifiers

PMID25214612
PMCPMC4447626

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.