ArticleBMJ open2020
Is an ounce of prevention worth a pound of cure? A cross-sectional study of the impact of English public health grant on mortality and morbidity.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prevention of Radiodermatitis With Topical Chinese Herbal Medicine: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Pooled it
- Socioeconomic value of adult respiratory vaccination in the United States: a benefit-cost analysis.Health affairs scholar · 2026Article
- Payment mechanisms to improve prevention spending in health care settings: A policy-focused evidence brief.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Quantifying the case for prevention: disease burden and cost-effective interventions in UK.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- What counts as public health expenditures? A comparative case study of Australia, Canada, and England.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Public health professionals' perspectives on alcohol public health interventions: a qualitative interview study.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Econometric analysis of the long-run relationship between preventive care spending and mortality: evidence from OECD countries, 1970-2019.Empirical economics · 2025Article
- Social and policy interventions to reduce hospital admissions among socioeconomically disadvantaged groups in OECD countries with universal health care: a systematic review.BMJ public health · 2025Article
- Rule of Prevention: a potential framework to evaluate preventive interventions for rare diseases.Journal of market access & health policy · 2023Article
- Cuts to local government spending, multimorbidity and health-related quality of life: A longitudinal ecological study in England.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2022Article
- Development and Validation of Population Clusters for Integrating Health and Social Care: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study in Multiple Long-Term Conditions (Cluster-Artificial Intelligence for Multiple Long-Term Conditions).JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Projecting future health and service use among older people in Ireland: an overview of a dynamic microsimulation model in The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA).HRB open research · 2022Article
- The cost-per-QALY threshold in England: Identifying structural uncertainty in the estimates.Frontiers in health services · 2022Article
- Causal impact of social care, public health and healthcare expenditure on mortality in England: cross-sectional evidence for 2013/2014.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Policy and planning for large epidemics and pandemics - challenges and lessons learned from COVID-19.Current opinion in infectious diseases · 2021Review
- Local government funding and life expectancy in England: a longitudinal ecological study.The Lancet. Public health · 2021Article
- Authors' Response to: "Health Opportunity Costs and Expert Elicitation: A Comment on Soares et al." by Sampson, Firth, and Towse.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2021Article
- Modifying NICE's Approach to Equity Weighting.PharmacoEconomics · 2021Article
- Multimorbidity combinations, costs of hospital care and potentially preventable emergency admissions in England: A cohort study.PLoS medicine · 2021Article
- Revisiting Alma Ata: A Blueprint for Cancer Care.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe UK government is proposing to cease cutting the local authority public health grant by reallocating part of the treatment budget to preventative activity. This study examines whether this proposal is evidenced based and, in particular, whether these resources are best reallocated to prevention, or whether this expenditure would generate more health gains if used for treatment.
methodsInstrumental variable regression methods are applied to English local authority data on mortality, healthcare and public health expenditure to estimate the responsiveness of mortality to variations in healthcare and public health expenditure in 2013/14. Using a well-established method, these mortality results are converted to a quality-adjusted life year (QALY) basis, and this facilitates the estimation of the cost per QALY for both National Health Service (NHS) healthcare and local public health expenditure.
resultsSaving lives and improving the quality of life requires resources. Our estimates suggest that each additional QALY costs about £3800 from the local public health budget, and that each additional QALY from the NHS budget costs about £13 500. These estimates can be used to calculate the number of QALYs generated by a budget boost. If we err on the side of caution and use the most conservative estimates that we have, then an additional £1 billion spent on public health will generate 206 398 QALYs (95% CI 36 591 to 3 76 205 QALYs), and an additional £1 billion spent on healthcare will generate 67 060 QALYs (95% CI 21 487 to 112 633 QALYs).
conclusionsAdditional public health expenditure is very productive of health and is more productive than additional NHS expenditure. However, both types of expenditure are more productive of health than the norms used by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (£20 000-£30 000 per QALY) to judge whether new therapeutic technologies are suitable for adoption by the NHS.
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.