ArticleBMC public health2017
Using the missed opportunity tool as an application of the Lives Saved Tool (LiST) for intervention prioritization.
Article in BMC public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Using the Lives Saved Tool to inform global nutrition advocacy.Journal of global health · 2024Article
- Impact of IYCF practices, as measured by national nutrition surveys from 2018 to 2022, on stunting and under-5 survival in Burkina Faso: a LiST analysis.Frontiers in nutrition · 2024Article
- Adapting and validating the log quadratic model to derive under-five age- and cause-specific mortality (U5ACSM): a preliminary analysis.Population health metrics · 2022Article
- Article
- Prioritizing the Scale-Up of Evidence-Based Nutrition and Health Interventions to Accelerate Stunting Reduction in Ethiopia.Nutrients · 2019Article
- Projecting stunting and wasting under alternative scenarios in Odisha, India, 2015-2030: a Lives Saved Tool (LiST)-based approach.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Facility conditions, obstetric and neonatal care practices, and availability of emergency obstetric and neonatal care in 72 rural health facilities in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: A cross-sectional study.Gates open research · 2019Article
- Article
- How is the Lives Saved Tool (LiST) used in the global health community? Results of a mixed-methods LiST user study.BMC public health · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Missed Opportunity tool was developed as an application in the Lives Saved Tool (LiST) to allow users to quickly compare the relative impact of interventions. Global Financing Facility (GFF) investment cases have been identified as a potential application of the Missed Opportunity analyses in Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Ethiopia, Kenya, and Tanzania, to use 'lives saved' as a normative factor to set priorities.
methodsThe Missed Opportunity analysis draws on data and methods in LiST to project maternal, stillbirth, and child deaths averted based on changes in interventions' coverage. Coverage of each individual intervention in LiST was automated to be scaled up from current coverage to 90% in the next year, to simulate a scenario where almost every mother and child receive proven interventions that they need. The main outcome of the Missed Opportunity analysis is deaths averted due to each intervention.
resultsWhen reducing unmet need for contraception is included in the analysis, it ranks as the top missed opportunity across the four countries. When it is not included in the analysis, top interventions with the most total deaths averted are hospital-based interventions such as labor and delivery management in the CEmOC and BEmOC level, and full treatment and supportive care for premature babies, and for sepsis/pneumonia.
conclusionsThe Missed Opportunity tool can be used to provide a quick, first look at missed opportunities in a country or geographic region, and help identify interventions for prioritization. While it is a useful advocate for evidence-based priority setting, decision makers need to consider other factors that influence decision making, and also discuss how to implement, deliver, and sustain programs to achieve high coverage.
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.