Priority setting in early childhood development: an analytical framework for economic evaluation of interventions

被引:4
|
作者
Verguet, Stephane [1 ]
Bolongaita, Sarah [1 ]
Morgan, Anthony [1 ]
Perumal, Nandita [1 ]
Sudfeld, Christopher R. [1 ]
Yousafzai, Aisha K. [1 ]
Fink, Guenther [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Harvard TH Chan Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Global Hlth & Populat, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] Univ Basel, Basel, Switzerland
[3] Swiss Trop & Publ Hlth Inst, Allschwil, Switzerland
来源
BMJ GLOBAL HEALTH | 2022年 / 7卷 / 06期
基金
比尔及梅琳达.盖茨基金会;
关键词
child health; public health; health economics; PSYCHOSOCIAL STIMULATION; RESPONSIVE STIMULATION; NUTRITION INTERVENTIONS; RANDOMIZED-TRIAL; GROWTH; CHILDREN; IMPROVES; OUTCOMES; PROGRAM; HEALTH;
D O I
10.1136/bmjgh-2022-008926
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background Early childhood development (ECD) sets the foundation for healthy and successful lives with important ramifications for education, labour market outcomes and other domains of well-being. Even though a large number of interventions that promote ECD have been implemented and evaluated globally, there is currently no standardised framework that allows a comparison of the relative cost-effectiveness of these interventions. Methods We first reviewed the existing literature to document the main approaches that have been used to assess the relative effectiveness of interventions that promote ECD, including early parenting and at-home psychosocial stimulation interventions. We then present an economic evaluation framework that builds on these reviewed approaches and focuses on the immediate impact of interventions on motor, cognitive, language and socioemotional skills. Last, we apply our framework to compute the relative cost-effectiveness of interventions for which recent effectiveness and costing data were published. For this last part, we relied on a recently published review to obtain effect sizes documented in a consistent manner across interventions. Findings Our framework enables direct value-for-money comparison of interventions across settings. Cost-effectiveness estimates, expressed in $ per units of improvement in ECD outcomes, vary greatly across interventions. Given that estimated costs vary by orders of magnitude across interventions while impacts are relatively similar, cost-effectiveness rankings are dominated by implementation costs and the interventions with higher value for money are generally those with a lower implementation cost (eg, psychosocial interventions involving limited staff). Conclusions With increasing attention and investment into ECD programmes, consistent assessments of the relative cost-effectiveness of available interventions are urgently needed. This paper presents a unified analytical framework to address this need and highlights the rather remarkable range in both costs and cost-effectiveness across currently available intervention strategies.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Should early childhood be a focus for obesity prevention? Applying a framework for setting priority target groups
    Nichols, M. S.
    Swinburn, B. A.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBESITY, 2008, 32 : S202 - S202
  • [2] Resource allocation in orthopaedics - Economic evaluation to priority setting
    Bate, Angela
    Donaldson, Cam
    Ray, Helen
    CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2007, (457) : 49 - 56
  • [3] Optimizing Interventions for Early Childhood Development
    Fawzi, Wafaie W.
    Partap, Uttara
    JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2024, 331 (01): : 25 - 27
  • [4] Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Interventions for Priority Setting in the Health System: An Update From WHO CHOICE
    Bertram, Melanie Y.
    Lauer, Jeremy A.
    Stenberg, Karin
    Edejer, Tesa Tan Trres
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH POLICY AND MANAGEMENT, 2021, 10 (11) : 673 - 677
  • [5] Proceduralism and its role in economic evaluation and priority setting in health
    Jan, Stephen
    SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2014, 108 : 257 - 261
  • [6] The EVIDEM framework and its usefulness for priority setting across a broad range of health interventions
    Sitaporn Youngkong
    Noor Tromp
    Dereck Chitama
    Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 9 (1)
  • [7] Economic Evaluation of Childhood Obesity Interventions: Reflections and Suggestions
    Emma Frew
    PharmacoEconomics, 2016, 34 : 733 - 740
  • [9] Successful Priority Setting in Low and Middle Income Countries: A Framework for Evaluation
    Kapiriri, Lydia
    Martin, Douglas K.
    HEALTH CARE ANALYSIS, 2010, 18 (02) : 129 - 147
  • [10] Setting priorities for development of emerging interventions against childhood diarrhoea
    Bhutta, Zulfiqar A.
    Zipursky, Alvin
    Wazny, Kerri
    Levine, Myron M.
    Black, Robert E.
    Bassani, Diego G.
    Shantosham, Mathuram
    Freedman, Stephen B.
    Grange, Adenike
    Kosek, Margaret
    Keenan, William
    Petri, William
    Campbell, Harry
    Rudan, Igor
    JOURNAL OF GLOBAL HEALTH, 2013, 3 (01)