ArticleHealth policy and planning2020
Distributional impact of the Malawian Essential Health Package.
Article in Health policy and planning, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Methodological heterogeneity and equity challenges of distributional cost-effectiveness analysis in healthcare: a systematic review from 2017 to 2025.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Pooled it
- Challenges and Limitations in Distributional Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: A Systematic Literature Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- Incorporating Equity Concerns in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses: A Systematic Literature Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2022Pooled it
- Using economic analysis to inform health resource allocation: lessons from Malawi.Discover health systems · 2024Review
- Distributional impact of infectious disease interventions in the Ethiopian Essential Health Service Package: a modelling study.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Considering equity in priority setting using transmission models: Recommendations and data needs.Epidemics · 2022Review
- How equitable is health spending on curative services and institutional delivery in Malawi? Evidence from a quasi-longitudinal benefit incidence analysis.International journal for equity in health · 2022Article
- Concomitant health benefits package design and research prioritisation: development of a new approach and an application to Malawi.BMJ global health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), making the best use of scarce resources is essential to achieving universal health coverage. The design of health benefits packages creates the opportunity to select interventions on the basis of explicit objectives. Distributional cost-effectiveness analysis (DCEA) provides a framework to evaluate interventions based on two objectives: increasing population health and reducing health inequality. We conduct aggregate DCEA of potential health benefits package interventions to demonstrate the feasibility of this approach in LMICs, using the case of the Malawian health benefits package. We use publicly available survey and census data common to LMICs and describe what challenges we encountered and how we addressed them. We estimate that diseases targeted by the health benefits package are most prevalent in the poorest population quintile and least prevalent in the richest quintile. The survey data we use indicate socioeconomic patterns in intervention uptake that diminish the population health gain and inequality reduction from the package. We find that a similar set of interventions would be prioritized when impact on health inequality is incorporated alongside impact on overall population health. However, conclusions about the impact of individual interventions on health inequalities are sensitive to assumptions regarding the health opportunity cost, the utilization of interventions, the distribution of diseases across population groups and the level of aversion to inequality. Our results suggest that efforts to improve access to the Essential Health Package could be targeted to specific interventions to improve the health of the poorest fastest but that identifying these interventions is uncertain. This exploratory work has shown the potential for applying the DCEA framework to inform health benefits package design within the LMIC setting and to provide insight into the equity impact of a health benefits package.
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.