Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34372987›Full record

SynthesisValue in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research2021

Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of Malaria Control Interventions: A Systematic Literature Review.

Lesong Conteh, Kathryn Shuford, Efundem Agboraw, Mara Kont, Jan Kolaczinski, Edith Patouillard

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  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

6 authors.

Lesong ContehDepartment of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, England, UK; School of Public Health, Imperial College London, St Mary's Campus, Paddington, England, UK.
Kathryn ShufordDepartment of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, England, UK.
Efundem AgborawVector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, England, UK.
Mara KontDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Imperial College London, England, UK.
Jan KolaczinskiDepartment of the Global Malaria Programme, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Edith PatouillardDepartment of Health Systems Governance and Financing, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. Electronic address: patouillarde@who.int.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo systematically review the literature on the unit cost and cost-effectiveness of malaria control.

methodsTen databases and gray literature sources were searched to identify evidence relevant to the period 2005 to 2018. Studies with primary financial or economic cost data from malaria endemic countries that took a provider, provider and household, or societal perspective were included.

resultsWe identified 103 costing studies. The majority of studies focused on individual rather than combined interventions, notably insecticide-treated bed nets and treatment, and commonly took a provider perspective. A third of all studies took place in 3 countries. The median provider economic cost of protecting 1 person per year ranged from $1.18 to $5.70 with vector control and from $0.53 to $5.97 with chemoprevention. The median provider economic cost per case diagnosed with rapid diagnostic tests was $6.06 and per case treated $9.31 or $89.93 depending on clinical severity. Other interventions did not share enough similarities to be summarized. Cost drivers were rarely reported. Cost-effectiveness of malaria control was reiterated, but care in methodological and reporting standards is required to enhance data transferability.

conclusionsImportant information that can support resource allocation was reviewed. Given the variability in methods and reporting, global efforts to follow existing standards are required for the evidence to be most useful outside their study context, supplemented by guidance on options for transferring existing data across settings.

Indexed as

ChemopreventionCost-Benefit AnalysisGlobal HealthHumansInsect ControlInsecticide-Treated BednetsMalariaMosquito Vectorscost-effectivenessdisease control interventionsmalariaunit cost

Identifiers

PMID34372987
PMCPMC8324482

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.