Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33962625›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2021

Assessing the household economic burden of non-communicable diseases in India: evidence from repeated cross-sectional surveys.

Veenapani Rajeev Verma, Piyush Kumar, Umakant Dash

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. CKD in Indigenous Populations in Kerala, India.Kidney international reports · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. "International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  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

3 authors.

Veenapani Rajeev VermaDepartment of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai, India. Veenapani.verma1@gmail.com.
Piyush KumarDepartment of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai, India.
Umakant DashDepartment of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFinancing for NCDs is encumbered by out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) assuming catastrophic proportions. Therefore, it is imperative to investigate the extent of catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) on NCDs, which are burgeoning in India. Thus, our paper aims to examine the extent of CHE and impoverishment in India, in conjunction with socio-economic determinants impacting the CHE.

methodsWe used cross-sectional data from nationwide healthcare surveys conducted in 2014 and 2017-18. OOPE on both outpatient and inpatient treatment was coalesced to estimate CHE on NCDs. Incidence of CHE was defined as proportion of households with OOPE exceeding 10% of household expenditure. Intensity of catastrophe was ascertained by the measure of Overshoot and Mean Positive Overshoot Indices. Further, impoverishing effects of OOPE were assessed by computing Poverty Headcount Ratio and Poverty Gap Index using India's official poverty line. Concomitantly, we estimated the inequality in incidence and intensity of catastrophic payments using Concentration Indices. Additionally, we delineated the factors associated with catastrophic expenditure using Multinomial Logistic Regression.

resultsResults indicated enormous incidence of CHE with around two-third households with NCDs facing CHE. Incidence of CHE was concentrated amongst poor that further extended from 2014(CI = - 0.027) to 2017-18(CI = - 0.065). Intensity of CHE was colossal as households spent 42.8 and 34.9% beyond threshold in 2014 and 2017-18 respectively with poor enduring greater overshoot vis-à-vis rich (CI = - 0.18 in 2014 and CI = - 0.23 in 2017-18). Significant immiserating impact of NCDs was unraveled as one-twelfth in 2014 and one-eighth households in 2017-18 with NCD burden were pushed to poverty with poverty deepening effect to the magnitude of 27.7 and 30.1% among those already below poverty on account of NCDs in 2014 and 2017-18 respectively. Further, large inter-state heterogeneities in extent of CHE and impoverishment were found and multivariate analysis indicated absence of insurance cover, visiting private providers, residing in rural areas and belonging to poorest expenditure quintile were associated with increased likelihood of incurring CHE.

conclusionSubstantial proportion of households face CHE and subsequent impoverishment due to NCD related expenses. Concerted efforts are required to augment the financial risk protection to the households, especially in regions with higher burden of NCDs.

Indexed as

Noncommunicable DiseasesCatastrophic IllnessCost of IllnessCross-Sectional StudiesHealth ExpendituresHumansIndiaPovertyCatastrophic health expenditureImpoverishmentNon communicable diseases

Identifiers

PMID33962625
PMCPMC8106177

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.