Publication:
Economic interventions to improve population health: A scoping study of systematic reviews

dc.contributor.authorMishal S. Khanen_US
dc.contributor.authorBernie Y. Guanen_US
dc.contributor.authorJananie Audimulamen_US
dc.contributor.authorFrancisco Cervero Licerasen_US
dc.contributor.authorRichard J. Cokeren_US
dc.contributor.authorJoanne Yoongen_US
dc.contributor.otherNational University of Singaporeen_US
dc.contributor.otherLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicineen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherUniversity of Southern Californiaen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-12-11T03:34:57Z
dc.date.accessioned2019-03-14T08:02:14Z
dc.date.available2018-12-11T03:34:57Z
dc.date.available2019-03-14T08:02:14Z
dc.date.issued2016-07-07en_US
dc.description.abstract© 2016 Khan et al. Background: Recognizing the close relationship between poverty and health, national program managers, policy-makers and donors are increasingly including economic interventions as part of their core strategies to improve population health. However, there is often confusion among stakeholders about the definitions and operational differences between distinct types of economic interventions and financial instruments, which can lead to important differences in interpretation and expectations. Methods: We conducted a scoping study to define and clarify concepts underlying key economic interventions - price interventions (taxes and subsidies), income transfer programs, incentive programs, livelihood support programs and health-related financial services - and map the evidence currently available from systematic reviews. Results: We identified 195 systematic reviews on economic interventions published between 2005 and July 2015. Overall, there was an increase in the number of reviews published after 2010. The majority of reviews focused on price interventions, income transfer programs and incentive programs, with much less evidence available from systematic reviews on livelihood support programs and health-related financial services. We also identified a lack of evidence on: health outcomes in low income countries; unintended or perverse outcomes; implementation challenges; scalability and cost-effectiveness of economic interventions. Conclusions: We conclude that while more research is clearly needed to assess suitability and effectiveness of economic interventions in different contexts, before interventions are tested and further systematic reviews conducted, a consistent and accurate understanding of the fundamental differences in terminology and approaches is essential among researchers, public health policy makers and program planners.en_US
dc.identifier.citationBMC Public Health. Vol.16, No.1 (2016)en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12889-016-3119-5en_US
dc.identifier.issn14712458en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-84977517223en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/41287
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84977517223&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleEconomic interventions to improve population health: A scoping study of systematic reviewsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84977517223&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections