SynthesisPloS one2015
Can Economic Analysis Contribute to Disease Elimination and Eradication? A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Economic evaluations of onchocerciasis interventions: a systematic review and research needs.Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH · 2019Pooled it
- When is elimination of an infectious disease cost-effective? An analytical framework to guide elimination priorities.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2026Article
- HIV self-testing: lessons learnt and priorities for adaptation in a shifting landscape.BMJ global health · 2021Article
- Review of poliovirus modeling performed from 2000 to 2019 to support global polio eradication.Expert review of vaccines · 2020Review
- Multiple agents managing a harmful species population should either work together to control it or split their duties to eradicate it.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020Article
- Article
- Leprosy services in primary health care in India: comparative economic cost analysis of two public-health settings.Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH · 2019Article
- Malaria and Economic Evaluation Methods: Challenges and Opportunities.Applied health economics and health policy · 2017Article
- The Vital Case for Global Health Investments by the US Government.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2017Article
- Modelling the health impact and cost-effectiveness of lymphatic filariasis eradication under varying levels of mass drug administration scale-up and geographic coverage.BMJ global health · 2016Article
- Financial and Economic Costs of the Elimination and Eradication of Onchocerciasis (River Blindness) in Africa.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInfectious diseases elimination and eradication have become important areas of focus for global health and countries. Due to the substantial up-front investments required to eliminate and eradicate, and the overall shortage of resources for health, economic analysis can inform decision making on whether elimination/eradication makes economic sense and on the costs and benefits of alternative strategies. In order to draw lessons for current and future initiatives, we review the economic literature that has addressed questions related to the elimination and eradication of infectious diseases focusing on: why, how and for whom?
methodsA systematic review was performed by searching economic literature (cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness and economic impact analyses) on elimination/eradication of infectious diseases published from 1980 to 2013 from three large bibliographic databases: one general (SCOPUS), one bio-medical (MEDLINE/PUBMED) and one economic (IDEAS/REPEC).
resultsA total of 690 non-duplicate papers were identified from which only 43 met the inclusion criteria. In addition, only one paper focusing on equity issues, the "for whom?" question, was found. The literature relating to "why?" is the largest, much of it focusing on how much it would cost. A more limited literature estimates the benefits in terms of impact on economic growth with mixed results. The question of how to eradicate or eliminate was informed by an economic literature highlighting that there will be opportunities for individuals and countries to free-ride and that forms of incentives and/or disincentives will be needed. This requires government involvement at country level and global coordination. While there is little doubt that eliminating infectious diseases will eventually improve equity, it will only happen if active steps to promote equity are followed on the path to elimination and eradication.
conclusionThe largest part of the literature has focused on costs and economic benefits of elimination/eradication. To a lesser extent, challenges associated with achieving elimination/eradication and ensuring equity have also been explored. Although elimination and eradication are, for some diseases, good investments compared with control, countries' incentives to eliminate do not always align with the global good and the most efficient elimination strategies may not prioritize the poorest populations. For any infectious disease, policy-makers will need to consider realigning contrasting incentives between the individual countries and the global community and to assure that the process towards elimination/eradication considers equity.
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.