Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34983750›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2022

Cost-effectiveness analysis of implementing an integrated neonatal care kit to reduce neonatal infection in rural Pakistan.

Fiona Muttalib, Karen Chung, Lisa Grace Pell, Shabina Ariff, Sajid Soofi, Shaun K Morris, Beate Sander

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02130856 (An Integrated Toolkit to Save Newborn Lives in Pakistan), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 41% 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.

NCT02130856 phase3completednot on this map

An Integrated Toolkit to Save Newborn Lives in Pakistan

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe Hospital for Sick ChildrenRan2014 to 2017Enrolled8,518ConditionsNeonatal MortalityArmsNeonatal kit
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Fiona MuttalibCentre for Global Child Health, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Fiona.muttalib@mail.utoronto.ca.ORCID 0000-0001-5730-4142
Karen ChungDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Lisa Grace PellCentre for Global Child Health, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Shabina AriffPediatrics and Child Health, Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.
Sajid SoofiPediatrics and Child Health, Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.ORCID 0000-0003-4192-8406
Shaun K MorrisCentre for Global Child Health, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9809-0822
Beate SanderDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
University of Toronto · CAAga Khan University · PKHospital for Sick Children · CAUniversity Health Network · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of distribution of the integrated neonatal care kit (iNCK) by community health workers from the healthcare payer perspective in Rahimyar Khan, Pakistan.

settingRahimyar Khan, Pakistan.

participantsN/A.

interventionCost-utility analysis using a Markov model based on cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT: NCT02130856) data and a literature review. We compared distribution of the iNCK to pregnant mothers to local standard of care and followed infants over a lifetime horizon. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was incremental net monetary benefit (INMB, at a cost-effectiveness threshold of US$15.50), discounted at 3%. Secondary outcomes were life years, disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) and costs.

resultsAt a cost-effectiveness threshold of US$15.50, distribution of the iNCK resulted in lower expected DALYs (28.7 vs 29.6 years) at lower expected cost (US$52.50 vs 55.20), translating to an INMB of US$10.22 per iNCK distributed. These results were sensitive to the baseline risk of infection, cost of the iNCK and the estimated effect of the iNCK on the relative risk of infection. At relative risks of infection below 0.79 and iNCK costs below US$25.90, the iNCK remained cost-effective compared with current local standard of care.

conclusionThe distribution of the iNCK dominated the current local standard of care (ie, the iNCK is less costly and more effective than current care standards). Most of the cost-effectiveness of the iNCK was attributable to a reduction in neonatal infection.

Indexed as

Community Health WorkersRural PopulationCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornPakistanPregnancycommunity child healthhealth economicsneonatology

Identifiers

PMID34983750
PMCPMC8728405
OpenAlexW4206259567

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.