4.3 Article

Cost comparison of five Australasian obesity prevention interventions for children aged from birth to two years

期刊

PEDIATRIC OBESITY
卷 15, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ijpo.12684

关键词

obesity; prevention; intervention; cost

资金

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) [APPID1101675]
  2. Alfred Deakin Postdoctoral Research Fellowship
  3. Australian Research Council [FT130100637]
  4. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) [APPID1101675]
  5. Australian Research Council [FT130100637] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background In the absence of rigorous evidence of cost-effectiveness for early childhood obesity prevention interventions, the next-best option may be for decision-makers to consider the relevant costs of interventions when allocating resources. Objectives This study aimed to estimate systematically the cost of five obesity prevention interventions in children aged 0-2 years, undertaken in research settings in Australia and New Zealand. Methods A standardised costing protocol informed the costing methodology, ensuring comparability of results across interventions. Micro-costing was undertaken, with intervention costs defined from the funder perspective and valued in 2018 Australian dollars using unit costs from the trials or market rates. Results Interventions varied widely in their resource use. The total cost per participant ranged from $80 for the CHAT SMS intervention arm (95% UI $77-$82) to $1135 for the Healthy Beginnings intervention (95% UI $1059-$1189). Time costs of personnel delivering interventions contributed >50% of total intervention costs for all included studies. Conclusions An understanding of the costs associated with intervention delivery modes is important, alongside effectiveness. Telephone delivery may include unexpected costs associated with connection to intervention participants at convenient times. A SMS-based intervention had the lowest delivery cost in this study.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据