Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 20, 2026

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
Published on: January 12, 2018
Equitable Prioritization of Health Interventions by Incorporating Financial Risk Protection Weights Into Economic
Nathaniel Hendrix1, Sarah Bolongaita1, Dominick Villano1
1Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Objectives:
Financial risk protection (FRP), or the prevention of medical impoverishment, is a major objective of health systems, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where the extent of out-of-pocket (OOP) health expenditures can be substantial. We sought to develop a method that allows decision makers to explicitly integrate FRP outcomes into their priority-setting activities.
Methods:
We used literature review to identify 31 interventions in low- and middle-income countries, each of which provided measures of health outcomes, costs, OOP health expenditures averted, and FRP (proxied by OOP health expenditures averted as a percentage of income), all disaggregated by income quintile. We developed weights drawn from the Z-score of each quintile-intervention pair based on the distribution of FRP of all quintile-intervention pairs. We next ranked the interventions by unweighted and weighted health outcomes for each income quintile. We also evaluated how pro-poor they were by, first, ordering the interventions by cost-effectiveness for each quintile and, next, calculating the proportion of interventions each income quintile would be targeted for a given random budget. A ranking was said to be pro-poor if each quintile received the same or higher proportion of interventions than richer quintiles.
Results:
Using FRP weights produced a more pro-poor priority setting than unweighted outcomes. Most of the reordering produced by the inclusion of FRP weights occurred in interventions of moderate cost-effectiveness, suggesting that these weights would be most useful as a way of distinguishing moderately cost-effective interventions with relatively high potential FRP.
Conclusions:
This preliminary method of integrating FRP into priority-setting would likely be most suitable to deciding between health interventions with intermediate cost-effectiveness.
More Related Videos
06:55Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
07:31Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack
Published on: May 15, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Preventive Healthcare Services
Models of Health Promotion and Illness Prevention II
The agent-host-environment model states that disease results...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Relative Risk
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial...