Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35392475›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

Disability Weights Estimates From India in 2018: Measurements From Community Members From Two Distinct States of India.

Lipika Nanda, Eunice Lobo, Geetha R Menon, Pratik Dhopte, Shuchi Sree Akhouri, Chandni Shrivastava, Roshan Ronghang, Aiswarya Anilkumar, Ambarish Dutta

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 96% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Lipika NandaIndian Institute of Public Health-Hyderabad, Public Health Foundation of India, Hyderabad, India.
Eunice LoboIndian Institute of Public Health-Bengaluru, Public Health Foundation of India, Bengaluru, India.
Geetha R MenonNational Institute of Medical Statistics, Indian Council of Medical Research, New Delhi, India.
Pratik DhopteHealth Economics and Outcome Research, Mumbai, India.
Shuchi Sree AkhouriDepartment of Concurrent Measurements and Learning, Care India, Patna, India.
Chandni ShrivastavaNational Health Mission, Chhattisgarh, India.
Roshan RonghangNational Health Mission, Meghalaya, India.
Aiswarya AnilkumarIndian Institute of Public Health-Hyderabad, Public Health Foundation of India, Hyderabad, India.
Ambarish DuttaIndian Institute of Public Health-Bhubaneswar, Public Health Foundation of India, Bhubaneswar, India.
Institute of Public Health · INPublic Health Foundation of India · INCare India · INIndian Council of Medical Research · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: India is undergoing a rapid demographic and epidemiologic transition. Thus demanding prioritization of diseases based on burden estimation is befitting our cultural diversity. Disability weights (DWs) by Global burden of disease (GBD) studies may not be representative. Hence, a study was conducted to estimate state-specific disability weights to capture the community health perceptions that included urban-rural settings as well as different socio-economic and literacy levels. Methods: A total of 2,055 community members (participants) from two distinct states of India, Odisha and Telangana, were interviewed to assign disability weights to the selected 14 health states based on the state burden and relevance. Each health state was described to the participants using pictorial representations of the health states and valuated using visual analog scale and card sort methods. Results: We noted that DWs in Odisha ranged from 0.32 (0.30-0.34) for upper limb fracture due to road traffic accident (least severe) to 0.90 (0.88-0.93) for breast cancer (most severe) among the 14 health states. While, in Telangana, diarrhea was considered least severe [DW = 0.22 (0.19-0.24)] and breast cancer remained most severe [DW = 0.85 (0.83-0.88)] as in Odisha. Marked difference in the DWs for other health states was also seen. Further, on comparison of community weights with GBD weights using Spearman correlation, we observed a low correlation (ρ = 0.104). Conclusion: Our study provides community-based findings that show how participants valued noncommunicable diseases higher than short-term ailments or infectious diseases. Additionally, the low correlation between GBD also suggests the need for local disability weights rather than universal acceptance. We therefore recommend that decisions in policy-making, especially for resource allocation and priority setting, need to be based not only on expert opinion but also include community in accordance with high scientific standards.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsPersons with DisabilitiesFemaleHumansIndiaRural Populationcommunitydisability weightsglobal burden of diseaseshealth state valuationIndia

Identifiers

PMID35392475
PMCPMC8980316
OpenAlexW4220823278

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.