ArticleBMJ global health2026
Lives saved and financial risk protectionfrom scaling up kangaroo mother care in India: an extended cost -effectivenessanalysis.
Article in BMJ global health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionKangaroo mother care (KMC) is a proven, low-cost intervention to reduce neonatal mortality, yet its coverage remains limited in most low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), including India. In this study, we examined the impact of scaling up KMC in India on distribution of health and financial outcomes using an extended cost-effectiveness analysis (ECEA) framework.
methodsBuilding on primary data from a randomised controlled trial (RCT), we modelled the health and financial outcomes of scaling up KMC to 95% coverage nationally. We estimated lives saved, disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) averted, out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) averted and cases of catastrophic healthcare expenditure prevented. Estimates were disaggregated by socioeconomic quintiles and geography. We used deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of our findings.
resultsScaling up KMC in India could save around 26 000 neonatal lives annually, avert approximately 1.6 million DALYs, reduce OOPE by around US$13 million and prevent an estimated 57 000 households from experiencing catastrophic health expenditures. Three-fourths of the benefits would be concentrated in the lowest two socioeconomic quintiles. Six high-burden states, including Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh, accounted for 90% of the health and financial gains. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ranged from 0.08 to 0.17 times gross domestic product per capita for India across different quintiles. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed scaling up KMC would be cost-effective in 97.8% of simulations.
conclusionOur findings suggest that scaling up KMC is cost-effective and can reduce health inequities, particularly benefiting the lowest socioeconomic groups and high-burden states. Incorporating geographical disaggregation and using primary RCT data into ECEA enhance its utility for informing evidence-based, equity-focused health policies in LMICs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
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.