SynthesisGlobal health action2026
Catastrophic health expenditure and associated factors in low-, lower-middle and upper-middle-income countries: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Global health action, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReducing catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) is critical for achieving Universal Health Coverage (UHC), as high out-of-pocket healthcare spending can cause financial hardship and hinder access to care. However, evidence on CHE prevalence and associated factors in low-income (LICs), lower-middle-income (Lower-MICs), and upper-middle-income (UMICs) countries remains fragmented.
objectivesTo systematically review and synthesize evidence on the prevalence and factors of CHE in LICs, Lower-MICs, and UMICs.
methodsFollowing registered protocol (PROSPERO: CRD42024521553) and PRISMA guidelines, we searched CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for studies published between 2015 and 2023. Quantitative studies that measured CHE and/or associated factors at the 10% threshold of household total expenditure/income and/or the 40% threshold of non-food expenditure were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the AXIS tool. A random-effects meta-analysis estimated the pooled prevalence of CHE, and associated factors were synthesized narratively.
resultsForty studies were included. Key determinants increasing CHE risk were low income, elderly or chronically ill members, private facilities use, female-headed households, and lack of insurance, while education and employment were protective. Rural residence was generally associated with higher CHE despite mixed findings. Pooled CHE prevalence was 18% (95% CI: 14-23%) at the 10% threshold and 7% (95% CI: 5-10%) at the 40% threshold, with considerable heterogeneity (I
conclusionsCHE remains considerable, particularly in Lower-MICs and UMICs, and varies across income groups. Achieving UHC requires policies to strengthen financial protection and reduce socioeconomic disparities.
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.