ArticleBMC public health2017
Lives Saved Tool (LiST) costing: a module to examine costs and prioritize interventions.
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 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perceptions of healthcare professionals of the application of the National Program for Women and Child Health in Bacău County, Romania: a cross-sectional study.Medicine and pharmacy reports · 2026Article
- The cost of inaction to strengthen the resilience of primary health care in Latin America and the Caribbean: a modelling study.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2025Article
- Optimal allocation of antenatal and young child nutrition interventions: an individual-based global burden of disease calibrated microsimulation.BMC global and public health · 2025Article
- The costs and benefits of scaling up interventions to prevent poor birth outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries: a modelling study.The Lancet. Global health · 2024Article
- Using the Lives Saved Tool to inform global nutrition advocacy.Journal of global health · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness of implementing performance-based financing for improving maternal and child health in Ethiopia.PloS one · 2024Article
- State of HIV costing in Latin America and the Caribbean: a systematic literature review.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2024Review
- Effects of public financing of essential maternal and child health interventions across wealth quintiles in Nigeria: an extended cost-effectiveness analysis.The Lancet. Global health · 2023Article
- Estimating additional schooling and lifetime earning obtained from improved linear growth in low- and middle-income countries using the Lives Saved Tool (LiST).Journal of global health · 2022Article
- Costs and Cost Drivers of Providing Option B+ Services to Mother-Baby Pairs for PMTCT of HIV in Health Centre IV Facilities in Jinja District, Uganda.BioMed research international · 2020Article
- Are there decision support tools that might strengthen the health system for perinatal care in South African district hospitals? A review of the literature.BMC health services research · 2019Review
- Pushing the envelope through the Global Financing Facility: potential impact of mobilising additional support to scale-up life-saving interventions for women, children and adolescents in 50 high-burden countries.BMJ global health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAchieving the Sustainable Development Goals will require careful allocation of resources in order to achieve the highest impact. The Lives Saved Tool (LiST) has been used widely to calculate the impact of maternal, neonatal and child health (MNCH) interventions for program planning and multi-country estimation in several Lancet Series commissions. As use of the LiST model increases, many have expressed a desire to cost interventions within the model, in order to support budgeting and prioritization of interventions by countries. A limited LiST costing module was introduced several years ago, but with gaps in cost types. Updates to inputs have now been added to make the module fully functional for a range of uses.
methodsThis paper builds on previous work that developed an initial version of the LiST costing module to provide costs for MNCH interventions using an ingredients-based costing approach. Here, we update in 2016 the previous econometric estimates from 2013 with newly-available data and also include above-facility level costs such as program management. The updated econometric estimates inform percentages of intervention-level costs for some direct costs and indirect costs. These estimates add to existing values for direct cost requirements for items such as drugs and supplies and required provider time which were already available in LiST Costing.
resultsResults generated by the LiST costing module include costs for each intervention, as well as disaggregated costs by intervention including drug and supply costs, labor costs, other recurrent costs, capital costs, and above-service delivery costs. These results can be combined with mortality estimates to support prioritization of interventions by countries.
conclusionsThe LiST costing module provides an option for countries to identify resource requirements for scaling up a maternal, neonatal, and child health program, and to examine the financial impact of different resource allocation strategies. It can be a useful tool for countries as they seek to identify the best investments for scarce resources. The purpose of the LiST model is to provide a tool to make resource allocation decisions in a strategic planning process through prioritizing interventions based on resulting impact on maternal and child mortality and morbidity.
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.