Evidence mapPaperPMID 36958740Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2023

Cost-effectiveness of a direct to beneficiary mobile communication programme in improving reproductive and child health outcomes in India.

Amnesty Elizabeth LeFevre, Jai Mendiratta, Youngji Jo, Sara Chamberlain, Osama Ummer, Molly Miller, Kerry Scott, Neha Shah, Arpita Chakraborty, Anna Godfrey and 2 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03576157 (Impact Evaluation of Maternal Health Information Messaging in India), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03576157 nacompletednot on this map

Impact Evaluation of Maternal Health Information Messaging in India

TypeinterventionalSponsorJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthRan2018 to 2021Enrolled5,095ConditionsBreast Feeding, Family Planning, Essential Newborn Care, Training of Frontline Health WorkersArmsKilkari
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Amnesty Elizabeth LeFevreDivision of Public Health Medicine, University of Cape Town, School of Public Health, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa aelefevre@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-8437-7240
Jai MendirattaBBC Media Action-India, Delhi, India.
Youngji JoDepartment of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Connecticut, Farmington, Connecticut, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1440-2786
Sara ChamberlainBBC Media Action-India, Delhi, India.ORCID 0000-0003-4785-6482
Osama UmmerOxford Policy Management, New Delhi, India.ORCID 0000-0002-4189-5328
Molly MillerInternational Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Kerry ScottInternational Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3597-9637
Neha ShahInternational Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9450-604X
Arpita ChakrabortyResearch & Evidence, Oxford Policy Management, India, New Delhi, Delhi, India.ORCID 0000-0003-0515-3420
Anna GodfreyBBC Media Action, London, UK.
Priyanka DuttBBC Media Action-India, Delhi, India.
Diwakar MohanInternational Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7532-366X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionKilkari is the largest maternal messaging programme of its kind globally. Between its initiation in 2012 in Bihar and its transition to the government in 2019, Kilkari was scaled to 13 states across India and reached over 10 million new and expectant mothers and their families. This study aims to determine the cost-effectiveness of exposure to Kilkari as compared with no exposure across 13 states in India.

methodsThe study was conducted from a programme perspective using an analytic time horizon aligned with national scale-up efforts from December 2014 to April 2019. Economic costs were derived from the financial records of implementing partners. Data on incremental changes in the practice of reproductive maternal newborn and child health (RMNCH) outcomes were drawn from an individually randomised controlled trial in Madhya Pradesh and inputted into the Lives Saved Tool to yield estimates of maternal and child lives saved. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were carried out to assess uncertainty.

resultsInflation adjusted programme costs were US$8.4 million for the period of December 2014-April 2019, corresponding to an average cost of US$264 298 per year of implementation in each state. An estimated 13 842 lives were saved across 13 states, 96% among children and 4% among mothers. The cost per life saved ranged by year of implementation and with the addition of new states from US$392 ($385-$393) to US$953 ($889-$1092). Key drivers included call costs and incremental changes in coverage for key RMNCH practices.

conclusionKilkari is highly cost-effective using a threshold of India's national gross domestic product of US$1998. Study findings provide important evidence on the cost-effectiveness of a national maternal messaging programme in India.

trial registrationNCT03576157.

Indexed as

CommunicationMothersChildCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHumansIndiaInfant, NewbornOutcome Assessment, Health CareChild healthHealth economicsMaternal healthPrevention strategiesRandomised control trial

Identifiers

PMID36958740
PMCPMC10175950

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.