Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32467673›Full record

ReviewCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2020

Determinants of catastrophic health expenditures in Iran: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Leila Doshmangir, Mahmood Yousefi, Edris Hasanpoor, Behzad Eshtiagh, Hassan Haghparast-Bidgoli

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Contribution of Medication Expenditures to Catastrophic Health Expenditures in Iran: An Inequality Analysis.Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Applications and Challenges of Virtual Reality in Medical Sciences Education: A Systematic Review.Journal of advances in medical education & professionalism · 2026
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Leila Doshmangir1Tabriz Health Services Management Research Center, Iranian Center of Excellence in Health Management, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Mahmood Yousefi4Department of Health Economics, School of Health Management and Medical Informatics, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Edris Hasanpoor5Research Center for Evidence-Based Health Management, Maragheh University of Medical Sciences, Maragheh, Iran.
Behzad Eshtiagh3Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Management and Medical Informatics, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Hassan Haghparast-Bidgoli6Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Tabriz University of Medical Sciences · IRUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Maragheh · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCatastrophic health expenditures (CHE) are of concern to policy makers and can prevent individuals accessing effective health care services. The exposure of households to CHE is one of the indices used to evaluate and address the level of financial risk protection in health systems, which is a key priority in the global health policy agenda and an indicator of progress toward the UN Sustainable Development Goal for Universal Health Coverage. This study aims to assess the CHE at population and disease levels and its influencing factors in Iran.

methodsThis study is a systematic review and meta-analysis. The following keywords and their Persian equivalents were used for the review: Catastrophic Health Expenditures; Health Equity; Health System Equity; Financial Contribution; Health Expenditures; Financial Protection; Financial Catastrophe; and Health Financing Equity. These keywords were searched with no time limit until October 2019 in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, Embase, and the national databases of Iran. Studies that met a set of inclusion criteria formed part of the meta-analysis and results were analyzed using a random-effects model.

resultsThe review identified 53 relevant studies, of which 40 are conducted at the population level and 13 are disease specific. At the population level, the rate of CHE is 4.7% (95% CI 4.1% to 5.3%, n = 52). Across diseases, the percentage of CHE is 25.3% (95% CI 11.7% to 46.5%, n = 13), among cancer patients, while people undergoing dialysis face the highest percentage of CHE (54.5%). The most important factors influencing the rate of CHE in these studies are health insurance status, having a household member aged 60-65 years or older, gender of the head of household, and the use of inpatient and outpatient services.

conclusionThe results suggest that catastrophic health spending in Iran has increased from 2001 to 2015 and has reached its highest levels in the last 5 years. It is therefore imperative to review and develop fair health financing policies to protect people against financial hardship. This review and meta-analysis provides evidence to help inform effective health financing strategies and policies to prioritise high-burden disease groups and address the determinants of CHE.

Indexed as

Catastrophic health expendituresFair health financingHealth equityIran

Identifiers

PMID32467673
PMCPMC7229629
OpenAlexW3030505316

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.