Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorVaughan, Kelsey
dc.contributor.authorKok, Maryse C.
dc.contributor.authorWitter, Sophie
dc.contributor.authorDieleman, Marjolein
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-29T22:01:46Z
dc.date.available2018-06-29T22:01:46Z
dc.date.issued2015-09
dc.identifierER3991
dc.identifier.citationVaughan, K., Kok, M., Witter, S. & Dieleman, M. (2015) Costs and cost-effectiveness of community health workers: evidence from a literature review, Human Resources for Health, vol. 13, , ,
dc.identifier.issn1478-4491
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12960-015-0070-y
dc.identifier.urihttps://eresearch.qmu.ac.uk/handle/20.500.12289/3991
dc.description.abstractObjective This study sought to synthesize and critically review evidence on costs and cost-effectiveness of community health worker (CHW) programmes in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to inform policy dialogue around their role in health systems. Methods From a larger systematic review on effectiveness and factors influencing performance of close-to-community providers, complemented by a supplementary search in PubMed, we did an exploratory review of a subset of papers (32 published primary studies and 4 reviews from the period January 2003-July 2015) about the costs and cost-effectiveness of CHWs. Studies were assessed using a data extraction matrix including methodological approach and findings. Results Existing evidence suggests that, compared with standard care, using CHWs in health programmes can be a cost-effective intervention in LMICs, particularly for tuberculosis, but also - although evidence is weaker - in other areas such as reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health (RMNCH) and malaria. Conclusion Notwithstanding important caveats about the heterogeneity of the studies and their methodological limitations, findings reinforce the hypothesis that CHWs may represent, in some settings, a cost-effective approach for the delivery of essential health services. The less conclusive evidence about the cost-effectiveness of CHWs in other areas may reflect that these areas have been evaluated less (and less rigorously) than others, rather than an actual difference in cost-effectiveness in the various service delivery areas or interventions. Methodologically, areas for further development include how to properly assess costs from a societal perspective rather than just through the lens of the cost to government and accounting for non-tangible costs and non-health benefits commonly associated with CHWs.
dc.publisherBioMed Central
dc.relation.ispartofHuman Resources for Health
dc.titleCosts and cost-effectiveness of community health workers: evidence from a literature review
dc.typearticle
dcterms.accessRightspublic
dc.description.facultysch_iih
dc.description.volume13
dc.identifier.doihttp://doi:10.1186/s12960-015-0070-y
dc.description.ispublishedpub
dc.description.eprintid3991
rioxxterms.typearticle
qmu.authorWitter, Sophie
qmu.centreInstitute for Global Health and Development
dc.description.statuspub
dc.description.number1


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record