Search

Additional file 1: Appendix 1. PRISMA checklists. Appendix 2. Glossary. Appendix 3. Search strategy. Appendix 4. Inclusion and exclusion criteria. Appendix 5. Quality assessment of economic evaluations included in the review using the Extended Consensus on Health Economic Criteria list (CHEC-list). Appendix 6. Quality assessment of costing studies using a modified version of the Consensus Health Economic Criteria List (CHEC-list). Appendix 7. Expanded CHEC-list: Additional questions on the quality of economic evaluations of physical activity mass media campaigns. Appendix 8. GRADE style rating for model-based economic evaluation of physical activity mass media campaigns. Appendix 9. Records excluded at full-text screening and reasons for exclusion. Appendix 10. Implicit thresholds for willingness to pay for each country provided by WHO team. Appendix 11. Application of the GRADE style rating to assess the certainty of each economic model for WHO decision-making. Appendix 12. Additional resources on Agita São Paulo campaign. Appendix table 1. Characteristics of studies included in this review according to study type: model-based analyses and costing studies. Appendix table 2. Mass media campaigns by target population. Appendix table 3. Mass media campaigns by geographical location. Appendix table 4. Description of the approach to the model-based analyses of economic evaluations of physical activity mass media campaigns. Appendix table 5. Main economic evaluation findings of model-based analyses of physical activity mass media campaigns. Appendix table 6. Description of cost items and valuation sources used in the economic evaluations of physical activity mass media campaign. Appendix table 7. Quality of economic evaluation of physical activity mass media campaigns according to CHEC-List. Appendix table 8. Expanded CHEC-list: Additional questions on the quality of economic evaluations of physical activity mass media campaigns. Appendix table 9. Quality of costing studies according to a modified version of CHEC-list. Appendix table 10. Intervention costs description

Submitted by Maria Creuza Silva (mariakreuza@yahoo.com.br) on 2011-10-05T14:30:46Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Per int 2011.16.pdf: 319669 bytes, checksum: 641dd90a191e6739caa9807e0f46753c (MD5) Made available in DSpace on 2011-10-05T14:30:48Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Per int 2011.16.pdf: 319669 bytes, checksum: 641dd90a191e6739caa9807e0f46753c (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011 Funds to promote access to water and sanitation in developing countries are scarce and most of the investments come from the national governments and households sources, not international resources. In many of these countries, mainly in middle income countries, households are paying direct taxes to access these services, and understanding what determines their choice and motivation is fundamental to promote access to them. It has been argued that is not enough to supply a wide range of alternatives unless the individuals can recognise their benefits and sustainability. The objective of this paper is to understand the choice of sanitation technology by residents in the city of Salvador, Brazil. We propose a unique hybrid choice model that incorporates a set of latent attitudinal variables and explains how the demographic factors within a household influence choice. The substantial difference of our hybrid choice model from descriptive frameworks is that it integrates choice and latent variables (such as attitudes and preferences) allowing us to model explicitly the cognitive process that influences sanitation adoption, draw conclusions from cognitive variables associated with individuals’ socio-economic and demographic characteristics, and establishes a causal pathway among these variables. The results show that the attributes of health protection, accessibility, privacy, and house modernisation were what households cared about when opting for flush toilet and sewerage connection, rather than the high cost and consequent household socio-economic status associated with them. The hybrid model is statistically consistent with these findings, and seems to fill the gap between behavioural theory and discrete choice models applied to sanitation. Oxford

p. 2-8 Submitted by Rodrigo Meirelles (rodrigomei@ufba.br) on 2011-07-07T16:31:15Z No. of bitstreams: 1 artigo internac.3.livre 2007.pdf: 266774 bytes, checksum: da68fc9b9089973075f640e182e769c4 (MD5) Made available in DSpace on 2011-07-07T16:31:15Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 artigo internac.3.livre 2007.pdf: 266774 bytes, checksum: da68fc9b9089973075f640e182e769c4 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2007 Background: Asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases and a major economical burden to families and health systems. Whereas efficacy of current therapeutical options has been clearly established, cost-effectiveness analysis of public health interventions for asthma control are scarce. Methods: 81 patients with severe asthma (12–75 years) joining a programme in a reference clinic providing free asthma medication were asked retrospectively about costs and events in the previous 12 months. During 12 months after joining the programme, information on direct and indirect costs, asthma control by lung function, symptoms and quality of life were collected. The information obtained was used to estimate cost-effectiveness of the intervention as compared to usual public health asthma management. Sensitivity analysis was conducted. Results: 64 patients concluded the study. During the 12-months follow-up within the programme, patients had 5 fewer days of hospitalization and 68 fewer visits to emergency/non scheduled medical visits per year, on average. Asthma control scores improved by 50% and quality of life by 74%. The annual saving in public resources was US$387 per patient. Family annual income increased US$512, and family costs were reduced by US$733. Conclusion: A programme for control of severe asthma in a developing country can reduce morbidity, improve quality of life and save resources from the health system and patients families.

p.122-128,v.39,n.1 Submitted by Rigaud Andréa (andrearigaud16@yahoo.com.br) on 2011-08-22T19:18:28Z No. of bitstreams: 1 16.pdf: 50237 bytes, checksum: 88c4c1c7fc48b20b8be00c0e77d4475d (MD5) Made available in DSpace on 2011-08-22T19:18:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 16.pdf: 50237 bytes, checksum: 88c4c1c7fc48b20b8be00c0e77d4475d (MD5) Previous issue date: 2005-01 OBJETIVO: A tuberculose é uma das maiores causas de mortalidade no mundo, porém seus efeitos econômicos são pouco conhecidos. O objetivo do estudo foi o de estimar os custos do tratamento e prevenção da tuberculose para o sistema de saúde (público e privado) e para as famílias. MÉTODOS: O estudo foi realizado no município de Salvador, BA, em 1999. Os dados para estimação dos custos para o sistema de saúde foram coletados nas secretarias de saúde, centros de saúde e em uma entidade filantrópica. Os custos públicos e privados foram estimados pela metodologia da contabilidade de custos. Os dados de custos para as famílias foram coletados por meio de questionários e incluem despesas com transporte, alimentação e outros, bem como as perdas de renda associadas à doença. RESULTADOS: O custo médio para tratamento de um caso novo de tuberculose foi de aproximadamente R$186,00 (US$103); para o tratamento de um paciente multiresistente o custo foi 27 vezes mais alto. Os custos para o serviço público corresponderam a 65% em internações, 32% em tratamento e apenas 3% em prevenção. As famílias comprometeram cerca de 33% da sua renda com despesas relacionadas a tuberculose. CONCLUSÕES: Apesar do fato das famílias não terem que pagar por medicamentos e tratamento, dado que este serviço é oferecido pelo Estado, os custos familiares ligados a perda de rendimentos devido a doença foram muito elevados. A proporção utilizada em prevenção pelo serviço público é pequena. Um maior investimento em campanhas de prevenção poderia não somente diminuir o número de casos, mas também, levar a um diagnósticos precoce, diminuindo os custos associados à hospitalização. A falta de um sistema integrado de custos não permite a visualização dos custos nos diversos setores. São Paulo

OBJECTIVE: Tuberculosis is one the greatest causes of mortality worldwide, but its economic effects are not well known. This study had the objective of estimating the costs to the public and private healthcare systems and to families of tuberculosis treatment and prevention. METHODS: This study was made in the municipality of Salvador, State of Bahia, Brazil, in 1999. Data for estimating the costs to the healthcare system were collected from the Department of Health, healthcare facilities and a philanthropic institution. The public and private costs were analyzed using cost accounting methodology. Cost data relating to families were collected by means of questionnaires, and included data on transportation, food and other expenses, and also income losses associated with this disease. RESULTS: The average cost of treating one new case of tuberculosis was approximately US$103. The cost of treating one multiresistant patient was 27 higher than this. The cost to the public services consisted of 65% on hospitalization, 32% on treatment, and only 3% on prevention. The families committed around 33% of their income on expenses related to tuberculosis. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the fact that the families did not have to pay for medications and treatment, given that this service is offered by the State, the costs to families related to loss of income due to the disease were very high. The proportion of public service funds utilized for prevention is small. Greater investment in prevention campaigns not only might diminish the numbers of cases but also might lead to earlier diagnosis, thus reducing the costs associated with hospitalization. The lack of an integrated cost accounting system makes it impossible to visualize costs across the various sectors.

p. 1-7 Submitted by Bruna Lessa (lessbruna@gmail.com) on 2012-08-20T19:23:33Z No. of bitstreams: 1 (173).pdf: 48998 bytes, checksum: 951b836881260652d34e716304882140 (MD5) Made available in DSpace on 2012-08-20T19:23:33Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 (173).pdf: 48998 bytes, checksum: 951b836881260652d34e716304882140 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2005 OBJECTIVE: Tuberculosis is one the greatest causes of mortality worldwide, but its economic effects are not well known. This study had the objective of estimating the costs to the public and private healthcare systems and to families of tuberculosis treatment and prevention. METHODS: This study was made in the municipality of Salvador, State of Bahia, Brazil, in 1999. Data for estimating the costs to the healthcare system were collected from the Department of Health, healthcare facilities and a philanthropic institution. The public and private costs were analyzed using cost accounting methodology. Cost data relating to families were collected by means of questionnaires, and included data on transportation, food and other expenses, and also income losses associated with this disease. RESULTS: The average cost of treating one new case of tuberculosis was approximately US$ 103. The cost of treating one multiresistant patient was 27 higher than this. The cost to the public services consisted of 65% on hospitalization, 32% on treatment, and only 3% on prevention. The families committed around 33% of their income on expenses related to tuberculosis. CONCLUSION: Despite the fact that the families did not have to pay for medications and treatment, given that this service is offered by the State, the costs to families related to loss of income due to the disease were very high. The proportion of public service funds utilized for prevention is small. Greater investment in prevention campaigns not only might diminish the numbers of cases but also might lead to earlier diagnosis, thus reducing the costs associated with hospitalization. The lack of an integrated cost accounting system makes it impossible to visualize costs across the various sectors.