Benjamin Herzel MS Institute for Health Policy Studies University of California San Francisco on behalf of the GHCC Session Introducing a Reference Case for Costing Global Health I nterventions ID: 1043641
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Assessing the Quality of Voluntary Medic..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
1. Assessing the Quality of Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision Costing LiteratureBenjamin Herzel, MSInstitute for Health Policy StudiesUniversity of California, San Francisco(on behalf of the GHCC)Session: Introducing a Reference Case for Costing Global Health InterventionsiHEA Boston 2017 Congress,Boston Massachusetts, USA8-11 July 2017
2. IntroductionHigh-quality studies use appropriate methods and provide detailed reportingAppropriate methods produce precise and replicable resultsDetailed reporting allows results to be used for intended purpose and settingObjective: To examine the methods used and the frequency of reporting in a comprehensive dataset extracted from Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision costing studies.
3. Search StrategyUsed Cochrane Collaboration methodsHIV/AIDS term based on search filter developed by the Cochrane HIV/AIDS Group, used in >100 Cochrane reviewsCost term based on the “best optimization of sensitivity & specificity” for econ studies Developed by Wilczynski et al. (2004) and McKinlay et al. (2006)Study dates from 1990-2016
4. VMMC Dataset29 studies identified and extracted759 cost observations11 countries represented
5. Reporting – Scope
6. Reporting – Sampling
7. Reporting – Methods (Cost Level)
8. Reporting – Inclusion of Costs
9. Reporting – Valuation
10. Reporting – Input Prices and Quantities
11. Economies of Scale
12. Compared by Subgroup
13. Methods – Type of Cost
14. Methods – Discount Rate
15. Methods – Above service costs
16. Methods – Timing
17. Methods – Sensitivity Analysis
18. ConclusionsVMMC costing studies exhibit heterogeneous reportingHigh-quality areas include costing purpose and inclusion/exclusion of overheadsLow-quality areas include sampling methods, allocation methods, cost sources, and input prices and quantities.Methodological choices are varied, even in similar contexts (VMMC in SSA)
19. VMMC and TB studies comparedSimilar findings:Infrequent reporting on full vs. incremental and economic vs. financial costingVery sparse reporting on sampling methodsDifferences:45% of VMMC studies report allocation method compared to approx. 4% of TB studiesVMMC studies much more likely to discuss or analyze scale effects (69% vs 35% in TB studies)
20. Next StepsDeveloping similar datasets for all HIV interventions in LMICs.Using data on reporting and methods to construct an empirically-validated quality-rating system