ArticleApplied health economics and health policy2017
A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Two Alternative Models of Maternity Care in Ireland.
Article in Applied health economics and health policy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global prevalence and associated factors of severe fear of childbirth: a systematic review and Meta-Analysis.Archives of women's mental health · 2026Pooled it
- A Scoping Review Mapping Economic Evaluations of Midwifery Service Provision and the Midwifery Workforce.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Article
- Cost-benefit analysis of haemodialysis in patients with end-stage kidney disease in Abuja, Nigeria.Health economics review · 2024Article
- Recommendations for developing a lifecycle, multidimensional assessment framework for mobile medical apps.Health economics · 2022Article
- Cost-benefit analysis of kidney transplant in patients with chronic kidney disease: a case study in Iran.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2022Article
- Midwifery-led care can lower caesarean section rates according to the Robson ten group classification system.European journal of midwifery · 2020Article
- Cost-benefit Analysis of IUI and IVF based on willingness to pay approach; case study: Iran.PloS one · 2020Article
- Valuing Mobile Health: An Open-Ended Contingent Valuation Survey of a National Digital Health Program.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Irish government has committed to expand midwifery-led care alongside consultant-led care nationally, although very little is known about the potential net benefits of this reconfiguration.
objectivesTo formally compare the costs and benefits of the major models of care in Ireland, with a view to informing priority setting using the contingent valuation technique and cost-benefit analysis.
methodsA marginal payment scale willingness-to-pay question was adopted from an ex ante perspective. 450 pregnant women were invited to participate in the study. Cost estimates were collected primarily, describing the average cost of a package of care. Net benefit estimates were calculated over a 1-year cycle using a third-party payer perspective.
resultsTo avoid midwifery-led care, women were willing to pay €821.13 (95% CI 761.66-1150.41); to avoid consultant-led care, women were willing to pay €795.06 (95% CI 695.51-921.15). The average cost of a package of consultant- and midwifery-led care was €1,762.12 (95% CI 1496.73-2027.51) and €1018.47 (95% CI 916.61-1120.33), respectively. Midwifery-led care ranked as the best use of resources, generating a net benefit of €1491.22 (95% CI 989.35-1991.93), compared with €123.23 (95% CI -376.58 to 621.42) for consultant-led care.
conclusionsWhile both models of care are cost-beneficial, the decision to provide both alternatives may be constrained by resource issues. If only one alternative can be implemented then midwifery-led care should be undertaken for low-risk women, leaving consultant-led care for high-risk women. However, pursuing one alternative contradicts a key objective of government policy, which seeks to improve maternal choice. Ideally, multiple alternatives should be pursued.
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.