Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123853
Title: Methodological variation in economic evaluations conducted in low- and middle- income countries: Information for reference case development
Authors: Santatiwongchai B.
Chantarastapornchit V.
Wilkinson T.
Thiboonboon K.
Rattanavipapong W.
Walker D.G.
Chalkidou K.
Teerawattananon Y. 
Keywords: acquired immune deficiency syndrome
economic evaluation
funding
health care cost
health program
human
Human immunodeficiency virus
lowest income group
malaria
middle income country
outcome assessment
resource allocation
Review
socioeconomics
standardization
systematic review (topic)
tuberculosis
vaccination
cost
economics
health care delivery
Human immunodeficiency virus infection
organization and management
socioeconomics
standards
statistical model
Melinda
vaccine
Costs and Cost Analysis
Delivery of Health Care
HIV Infections
Humans
Malaria
Models, Econometric
Socioeconomic Factors
Tuberculosis
Vaccines
Issue Date: 2015
Publisher: Public Library of Science
Citation: Santatiwongchai B., Chantarastapornchit V., Wilkinson T., Thiboonboon K., Rattanavipapong W., Walker D.G., Chalkidou K., Teerawattananon Y. (2015). Methodological variation in economic evaluations conducted in low- and middle- income countries: Information for reference case development. PLoS ONE 10 (5) : e0123853. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123853
Abstract: Information generated from economic evaluation is increasingly being used to inform health resource allocation decisions globally, including in low- and middle- income countries. However, a crucial consideration for users of the information at a policy level, e.g. funding agencies, is whether the studies are comparable, provide sufficient detail to inform policy decision making, and incorporate inputs from data sources that are reliable and relevant to the context. This review was conducted to inform a methodological standardisation workstream at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) and assesses BMGF-funded cost-per-DALY economic evaluations in four programme areas (malaria, tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS and vaccines) in terms of variation in methodology, use of evidence, and quality of reporting. The findings suggest that there is room for improvement in the three areas of assessment, and support the case for the introduction of a standardised methodology or reference case by the BMGF. The findings are also instructive for all institutions that fund economic evaluations in LMICs and who have a desire to improve the ability of economic evaluations to inform resource allocation decisions. © 2015 Santatiwongchai et al.
Source Title: PLoS ONE
URI: https://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/165694
ISSN: 19326203
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0123853
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications
Elements

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
10_1371_journal_pone_0123853.pdf1.4 MBAdobe PDF

OPEN

PublishedView/Download

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.