ArticleEuropean journal of public health2026
Scaling an equity-oriented extended home visiting programme in Sweden: costs and cross-sectoral fiscal distribution.
Article in European journal of public 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Inequalities in early childhood health persist across high-income countries, and structured home visiting is a principal policy response. Because such programmes are jointly produced by health and social services financed from separate budgets, the authority that pays is often not the authority that saves. We estimated the annual public-sector cost of scaling Sweden's extended home visiting programme nationally, and how it distributes between regional healthcare and municipal social services. A scenario-based costing analysis from a public-payer perspective. National registers gave an annual target population of 14 349 families. Unit costs came from micro-costing four pilot sites in disadvantaged areas in 2021. Three scenarios were modelled: a National Standard base case, a Facility-Based Adaptation, and an Enhanced Pilot. Costs are in 2023 Euros. Unit cost per family ranged from EUR 512 (Facility-Based) to EUR 1128 (Enhanced Pilot). Scaling the National Standard model would cost EUR 8.31 million annually, the Enhanced Pilot EUR 11.33 million. Regional healthcare carried 70%-76% of costs under every delivery model, because coordination, supervision, and training are overwhelmingly nurse and midwife time. Implementation choices change total cost but not its distribution between payers. Moving contacts from the home to a facility halves the cost and removes the setting through which the programme is theorized to reach marginalized families, without rebalancing the burden. Because the asymmetry follows from how the programme is staffed, scale-up requires explicit cross-sectoral financing agreements wherever health and social care budgets are held separately.
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.