Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37460265›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2023

Distributional impact of infectious disease interventions in the Ethiopian Essential Health Service Package: a modelling study.

Lelisa Fekadu Assebe, Ole Norheim

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact, top 86% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Lelisa Fekadu AssebeDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA lelfekadu1@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-7857-3349
Ole NorheimGlobal Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Harvard Global Health Institute · USUniversity of Bergen · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesReducing inequalities in health and financial risk are key goals on the path toward universal health coverage, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries. The design of the health benefit package creates an opportunity to select interventions through established criteria. The aim of this study is to examine the health equity and financial protection impact of selected interventions, along with their costs, at the national level in Ethiopia.

designDistributional cost-effectiveness analysis. POPULATION: The eligible population for all selected interventions is assumed to be 10 million. DATA SOURCES: Data on disease prevalence and population size were gathered from the Global Burden of Disease database, and average health benefits and program costs are sourced from the Ethiopian Essential Health Service Package (EHSP) database, national surveys and other publicly available sources.

interventionA total of 30 interventions were selected from the latest EHSP revision and analysed over a 1-year period. OUTCOME MEASURES: Health benefits, social welfare indices and financial protection metrics across income quintiles were reported.

resultsWe found 23 interventions that improve population health and reduce health inequality and four interventions reduce both population health and health inequality. Additionally, three interventions improve population health while increasing health inequality. Overall, the EHSP interventions provide a 0.021 improvement in health-adjusted life expectancy (HALE) per person, with a positive distributional equity impact: 0.029 (26.9%) HALE gained in the poorest and 0.015 (14.0%) in the richest quintile. Similarly, a total of 1 79 475 cases of catastrophic health expenditure were averted, including 82 100 (46.0%) cases in the poorest and 17 900 (10.0%) in the richest quintile.

conclusionIncreasing access to the EHSP improves health equity and financial protection. Improved access to selected EHSP interventions also has the potential to provide greater benefits to the poorest and thereby improve social welfare.

Indexed as

Communicable DiseasesHealth Status DisparitiesCost-Benefit AnalysisHealth ServicesHumansPovertydistributional analysiseconomic evaluationEthiopiafinancial risk protectionhealth inequality

Identifiers

PMID37460265
PMCPMC10357664
OpenAlexW4384501579

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.