Does health economics research align with the disease burden in the Middle East and North Africa region? A systematic review of economic evaluation studies on public health interventions
1
Issued Date
2022-12-01
Resource Type
eISSN
23970642
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-85134730451
Pubmed ID
35879742
Journal Title
Global Health Research and Policy
Volume
7
Issue
1
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Global Health Research and Policy Vol.7 No.1 (2022)
Suggested Citation
Nagi M.A., Rezq M.A.A., Sangroongruangsri S., Thavorncharoensap M., Dewi P.E.N. Does health economics research align with the disease burden in the Middle East and North Africa region? A systematic review of economic evaluation studies on public health interventions. Global Health Research and Policy Vol.7 No.1 (2022). doi:10.1186/s41256-022-00258-y Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/85281
Title
Does health economics research align with the disease burden in the Middle East and North Africa region? A systematic review of economic evaluation studies on public health interventions
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Introduction: Economic evaluation studies demonstrate the value of money in health interventions and enhance the efficiency of the healthcare system. Therefore, this study reviews published economic evaluation studies of public health interventions from 26 Middle East and North Africa (MENA) countries and examines whether they addressed the region's major health problems. Methods: PubMed and Scopus were utilized to search for relevant articles published up to June 26, 2021. The reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed the quality of studies using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Results: The search identified 61 studies. Approximately half (28 studies; 46%) were conducted in Israel and Iran. The main areas of interest for economic evaluation studies were infectious diseases (21 studies; 34%), cancers (13 studies; 21%), and genetic disorders (nine studies; 15%). Five (8%), 39 (64%), 16 (26%), and one (2%) studies were classified as excellent, high, average, and poor quality, respectively. The mean of CHEERS checklist items reported was 80.8% (SD 14%). Reporting the structure and justification of the selected model was missed in 21 studies (37%), while price and conversion rates and the analytical methods were missed in 21 studies (34%). Conclusions: The quantity of economic evaluation studies on public health interventions in the MENA region remains low; however, the overall quality is high to excellent. There were obvious geographic gaps across countries regarding the number and quality of studies and gaps within countries concerning disease prioritization. The observed research output, however, did not reflect current and upcoming disease burden and risk factors trends in the MENA region.