Economic Evaluations of Non-Communicable Disease Interventions in Developing Countries
Author Information
Author(s): Jo-Ann Mulligan, Damian Walker, Julia Fox-Rushby
Primary Institution: London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
Hypothesis
What is the quality of economic evaluations of non-communicable disease interventions in developing countries?
Conclusion
The study found that the quality of economic evaluations is poor, which could mislead resource allocation decisions.
Supporting Evidence
- The majority of studies were published in regional journals rather than general journals.
- Most studies focused on treatment rather than prevention or diagnosis.
- Public funding was the most common source of funding for the studies reviewed.
Takeaway
This study looked at how well different health programs for diseases like heart disease and cancer are evaluated in poorer countries, and found that many evaluations are not very good.
Methodology
The authors reviewed 32 economic evaluations of NCD interventions published between 1984 and 2003, assessing their methodological quality.
Potential Biases
Many studies lacked transparency in reporting costs and outcomes, which could affect their validity.
Limitations
The review was limited to English language publications and excluded unpublished and 'grey' literature.
Participant Demographics
The studies focused on low- and lower middle-income countries as defined by the World Bank.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website