Trial reportBMC health services research2025
Economic returns on investing in early childhood development in Vietnam: a cost-benefit analysis.
Trial report in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Early childhood education teachers' search for balance between children's developmental needs and the expectations of the curriculum.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEconomic evidence on the long-term benefits of investing in early childhood development is limited. This study aimed to estimate the potential long-term economic benefits of an early childhood development intervention 'Learning Clubs' in Vietnam.
methodsWe conducted a cost-benefit analysis to estimate the costs and benefits of the intervention compared to the standard of care from a limited societal perspective. The intervention cost and child cognitive development outcome were derived from the published 'Learning Clubs' trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis. Benefits were monetised based on the gains in wages associated with improved cognitive development over a lifetime at the population level, using a life-table model. The benefit-cost ratio was estimated as the benefits in wages divided by the intervention cost with a 3% discount rate, assuming nationwide scale up to a hypothetical national birth cohort. Sensitivity, scenario, and threshold analyses were conducted to examine the uncertainty around the model.
resultsThe benefit-cost ratio was 5.52, indicating that the expected benefit for each US$1 invested would be US$5.52. The intervention would generate economic benefits of US$1,566 per child over their lifetime. Upon nationwide scale-up, the total benefit would amount to US$2.28 billion per national annual birth cohort. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses estimated the benefit-cost ratio to be 5.90 (95%CI 2.66 to 11.12). The findings were relatively robust as the benefit-cost ratios remained above 1 in all sensitivity and scenario analyses.
conclusionsOur findings support greater investments in early childhood development. The Excel-based model is available for further use and adaption to other settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.