|
1
|
Xia Q, McPhail SM, Afoakwah C, Vo LK, Lim M, Brain D, Kuwornu JP, Carter HE. Growth and changing landscape of the cost-utility literature: an Australian perspective, 1992-2022. Health Policy 2025; 156:105319. [PMID: 40233686 DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2025.105319] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2024] [Revised: 02/20/2025] [Accepted: 04/08/2025] [Indexed: 04/17/2025]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Since the introduction of cost-utility analysis (CUA) in the 1990s, its methodologies and applications have evolved significantly in Australia. OBJECTIVES To provide a comprehensive overview of the volume, trends, and characteristics of the application of CUA in healthcare decision-making. METHODS Bibliometric analysis of published CUAs identified from the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, a `1comprehensive source of CUA data between 1992 and 2022. Multinomial logistic regression models were conducted to explore the associations between ICERs and variables including sponsorship, perspective, and discount rate. RESULTS N = 484 unique Australian-based CUAs were analysed. Over the last three decades, the volume and quality of CUAs in Australia have steadily increased. Commonly evaluated interventions included pharmaceuticals (21.5 %), health education/behaviour (18.0 %), and models of care (16.6 %), while diseases of circulatory system, cancers, and metabolic diseases were the most studied health conditions. Only nine CUAs involved First Nations people. Most CUAs (72.9 %) were conducted from a healthcare payer perspective, with only 19.0 % adopting a societal perspective. Approximately half of studies applied a 5 % discount rate, and 50.4 % used a $50,000 WTP threshold. 14.7 % CUAs were sponsored by industry. Regression analyses showed that industry sponsorship, societal perspective, and lower discount rate were positively associated with lower ICERs. CONCLUSIONS The increasing volume of CUAs underscores the importance of efficient allocation of scare resources in Australian health system. However, gaps remain, particularly in the inclusion of First Nations populations and the societal costs. Further research is needed to address these gaps and to evaluate the impact of sponsorship and discounting on CUA outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Qing Xia
- Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI) and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health & Social Work, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
| | - Steven M McPhail
- Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI) and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health & Social Work, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Queensland, Australia; Digital Health and Informatics Directorate, Metro South Health, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Clifford Afoakwah
- Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI) and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health & Social Work, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Queensland, Australia; Jamieson Trauma Institute, Metro North Health, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Linh K Vo
- Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI) and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health & Social Work, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Megumi Lim
- Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI) and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health & Social Work, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - David Brain
- Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI) and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health & Social Work, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - John Paul Kuwornu
- Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI) and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health & Social Work, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Hannah E Carter
- Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI) and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health & Social Work, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Jacobs J, Nichols M, Ward N, Sultana M, Allender S, Brown V. Exploring the Broader Benefits of Obesity Prevention Community-based Interventions From the Perspective of Multiple Stakeholders. HEALTH CARE ANALYSIS 2025; 33:151-172. [PMID: 39362998 PMCID: PMC12052814 DOI: 10.1007/s10728-024-00495-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/18/2024] [Indexed: 10/05/2024]
Abstract
Community-based interventions (CBIs) show promise as effective and cost-effective obesity prevention initiatives. CBIs are typically complex interventions, including multiple settings, strategies and stakeholders. Cost-effectiveness evidence, however, generally only considers a narrow range of costs and benefits associated with anthropometric outcomes. While it is recognised that the complexity of CBIs may result in broader non-health societal and community benefits, the identification, measurement, and quantification of these outcomes is limited. This study aimed to understand the perspectives of stakeholders on the broader benefits of CBIs and their measurement, as well as perceptions of CBI cost-effectiveness. Purposive sampling was used to recruit participants from three stakeholder groups (lead researchers, funders, and community stakeholders of CBIs). Online semi-structured interviews were conducted, taking a constructivist approach. Coding, theme development and analysis were based on published guidance for thematic analysis. Twenty-six stakeholders participated in the interviews (12 lead researchers; 7 funders; 6 community stakeholders). Six key themes emerged; (1) Impacts of CBIs (health impacts and broader impacts); (2) Broader benefits were important to stakeholders; (3) Measurement of benefits are challenging; (4) CBIs were considered cost-effective; (5) Framing CBIs for community engagement (6) Making equitable impacts and sustaining changes-successes and challenges. Across all stakeholders, broader benefits, particularly the establishment of networks and partnerships within communities, were seen as important outcomes of CBIs. Participants viewed the CBI approach to obesity prevention as cost-effective, however, there were challenges in measuring, quantifying and valuing broader benefits. Development of tools to measure and quantify broader benefits would allow for more comprehensive evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of CBIs for obesity prevention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Jacobs
- Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
| | - M Nichols
- Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia
| | - N Ward
- Deakin Health Economics, Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia
| | - M Sultana
- Deakin Health Economics, Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia
| | - S Allender
- Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia
| | - V Brown
- Deakin Health Economics, Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
|
3
|
Mendoza-Jiménez MJ, van Exel J, Brouwer W. On spillovers in economic evaluations: definition, mapping review and research agenda. THE EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS : HEPAC : HEALTH ECONOMICS IN PREVENTION AND CARE 2024; 25:1239-1260. [PMID: 38261132 PMCID: PMC11377364 DOI: 10.1007/s10198-023-01658-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/12/2023] [Accepted: 12/05/2023] [Indexed: 01/24/2024]
Abstract
An important issue in economic evaluations is determining whether all relevant impacts are considered, given the perspective chosen for the analysis. Acknowledging that patients are not isolated individuals has important implications in this context. Increasingly, the term "spillovers" is used to label consequences of health interventions on others. However, a clear definition of spillovers is lacking, and as a result, the scope of the concept remains unclear. In this study, we aim to clarify the concept of spillovers by proposing a definition applicable in health economic evaluations. To illustrate the implications of this definition, we highlight the diversity of potential spillovers through an expanded impact inventory and conduct a mapping review that outlines the evidence base for the different types of spillovers. In the context of economic evaluations of health interventions, we define spillovers as all impacts from an intervention on all parties or entities other than the users of the intervention under evaluation. This definition encompasses a broader range of potential costs and effects, beyond informal caregivers and family members. The expanded impact inventory enables a systematic approach to identifying broader impacts of health interventions. The mapping review shows that the relevance of different types of spillovers is context-specific. Some spillovers are regularly included in economic evaluations, although not always recognised as such, while others are not. A consistent use of the term "spillovers", improved measurement of these costs and effects, and increased transparency in reporting them are still necessary. To that end, we propose a research agenda.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- María J Mendoza-Jiménez
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management (ESHPM), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
- Erasmus Centre for Health Economics Rotterdam (EsCHER), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
- Facultad de Ciencias Sociales y Humanísticas, Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral (ESPOL), Guayaquil, Ecuador.
| | - Job van Exel
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management (ESHPM), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Erasmus Centre for Health Economics Rotterdam (EsCHER), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Werner Brouwer
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management (ESHPM), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Erasmus Centre for Health Economics Rotterdam (EsCHER), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
|
4
|
Lathe J, Silverwood RJ, Hughes AD, Patalay P. Examining how well economic evaluations capture the value of mental health. Lancet Psychiatry 2024; 11:221-230. [PMID: 38281493 DOI: 10.1016/s2215-0366(23)00436-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2023] [Revised: 12/21/2023] [Accepted: 12/27/2023] [Indexed: 01/30/2024]
Abstract
Health economics evidence informs health-care decision making, but the field has historically paid insufficient attention to mental health. Economic evaluations in health should define an appropriate scope for benefits and costs and how to value them. This Health Policy provides an overview of these processes and considers to what extent they capture the value of mental health. We suggest that although current practices are both transparent and justifiable, they have distinct limitations from the perspective of mental health. Most social value judgements, such as the exclusion of interindividual outcomes and intersectoral costs, diminish the value of improving mental health, and this reduction in value might be disproportionate compared with other types of health. Economic analyses might have disadvantaged interventions that improve mental health compared with physical health, but research is required to test the size of such differential effects and any subsequent effect on decision-making systems such as health technology assessment systems. Collaboration between health economics and the mental health sciences is crucial for achieving mental-physical health parity in evaluative frameworks and, ultimately, improving population mental health.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- James Lathe
- MRC Unit for Lifelong Health and Ageing, Department of Population Science and Experimental Medicine, Faculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London, UK.
| | - Richard J Silverwood
- Centre for Longitudinal Studies, Social Research Institute, Institute of Education, Faculty of Education and Society, University College London, London, UK
| | - Alun D Hughes
- MRC Unit for Lifelong Health and Ageing, Department of Population Science and Experimental Medicine, Faculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London, UK
| | - Praveetha Patalay
- MRC Unit for Lifelong Health and Ageing, Department of Population Science and Experimental Medicine, Faculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London, UK; Centre for Longitudinal Studies, Social Research Institute, Institute of Education, Faculty of Education and Society, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
|
5
|
Milanović M, Milošević N, Milić N, Stojanoska MM, Petri E, Filipović JM. Food contaminants and potential risk of diabetes development: A narrative review. World J Diabetes 2023; 14:705-723. [PMID: 37383596 PMCID: PMC10294057 DOI: 10.4239/wjd.v14.i6.705] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/27/2022] [Revised: 03/03/2023] [Accepted: 04/13/2023] [Indexed: 06/14/2023] Open
Abstract
The number of people diagnosed with diabetes continues to increase, especially among younger populations. Apart from genetic predisposition and lifestyle, there is increasing scientific and public concern that environmental agents may also contribute to diabetes. Food contamination by chemical substances that originate from packaging materials, or are the result of chemical reactions during food processing, is generally recognized as a worldwide problem with potential health hazards. Phthalates, bisphenol A (BPA) and acrylamide (AA) have been the focus of attention in recent years, due to the numerous adverse health effects associated with their exposure. This paper summarizes the available data about the association between phthalates, BPA and AA exposure and diabetes. Although their mechanism of action has not been fully clarified, in vitro, in vivo and epidemiological studies have made significant progress toward identifying the potential roles of phthalates, BPA and AA in diabetes development and progression. These chemicals interfere with multiple signaling pathways involved in glucose and lipid homeostasis and can aggravate the symptoms of diabetes. Especially concerning are the effects of exposure during early stages and the gestational period. Well-designed prospective studies are needed in order to better establish prevention strategies against the harmful effects of these food contaminants.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maja Milanović
- Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad 21000, Serbia
| | - Nataša Milošević
- Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad 21000, Serbia
| | - Nataša Milić
- Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad 21000, Serbia
| | - Milica Medić Stojanoska
- Faculty of Medicine, Clinic for Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolic Diseases, University Clinical Center of Vojvodina, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad 21000, Serbia
| | - Edward Petri
- Department of Biology and Ecology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad 21000, Serbia
| | - Jelena Marković Filipović
- Department of Biology and Ecology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad 21000, Serbia
| |
Collapse
|
|
6
|
García-Mochón L, Špacírová Z, Espín J. Costing methodologies in European economic evaluation guidelines: commonalities and divergences. THE EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS : HEPAC : HEALTH ECONOMICS IN PREVENTION AND CARE 2022; 23:979-991. [PMID: 34825296 DOI: 10.1007/s10198-021-01414-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2020] [Accepted: 11/11/2021] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
From both the methodological point of view and standardization of methodology, little attention has been paid to the estimation of direct costs in evaluation of healthcare technologies. The objective is to revise the recommendations on direct costs provided in European economic evaluation guidelines and to identify the commonalities and divergences among them. To achieve this, a comprehensive search through several online databases was performed resulting in 41 documents from 26 European countries, be they economic evaluation guidelines or costing guidelines. The results show a large disparity in methodologies used in estimation of direct costs to be included in economic evaluations of health technologies recommended by European countries. A lack of standardization of cost estimation methodologies influences arbitrariness in selecting costs of resources included in economic evaluations of medicinal products or any other technologies and, therefore, in decision making process necessary to introduce new technology. In addition, this heterogeneity poses a major challenge for identifying factors that could affect the variability of unit costs across countries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leticia García-Mochón
- Andalusian School of Public Health/Escuela Andaluza de Salud Pública (EASP), Granada, Spain
- Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria ibs, Granada, Spain
- CIBER en Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Spain/CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain
| | - Zuzana Špacírová
- Andalusian School of Public Health/Escuela Andaluza de Salud Pública (EASP), Granada, Spain.
- Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria ibs, Granada, Spain.
- CIBER en Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Spain/CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain.
| | - Jaime Espín
- Andalusian School of Public Health/Escuela Andaluza de Salud Pública (EASP), Granada, Spain
- Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria ibs, Granada, Spain
- CIBER en Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Spain/CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
|
7
|
Jiang S, Wang Y, Si L, Zang X, Gu YY, Jiang Y, Liu GG, Wu J. Incorporating productivity loss in health economic evaluations: a review of guidelines and practices worldwide for research agenda in China. BMJ Glob Health 2022; 7:bmjgh-2022-009777. [PMID: 35977755 PMCID: PMC9389102 DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2022-009777] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2022] [Accepted: 08/01/2022] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Productivity loss may contribute to a large proportion of costs of health conditions in an economic evaluation from a societal perspective, but there is currently a lack of methodological consensus on how productivity loss should be measured and valued. Despite the research progress surrounding this issue in other countries, it has been rarely discussed in China. Methods We reviewed the official guidelines on economic evaluations in different countries and regions and screened the literature to summarise the extent to which productivity loss was incorporated in economic evaluations and the underlying methodological challenges. Results A total of 48 guidelines from 46 countries/regions were included. Although 32 (67%) guidelines recommend excluding productivity loss in the base case analysis, 23 (48%) guidelines recommend including productivity loss in the base case or additional analyses. Through a review of systematic reviews and the economic evaluation studies included in these reviews, we found that the average probability of incorporating productivity loss in an economic evaluation was 10.2%. Among the economic evaluations (n=478) that explicitly considered productivity loss, most (n=455) considered losses from paid work, while only a few studies (n=23) considered unpaid work losses. Recognising the existing methodological challenges and the specific context of China, we proposed a practical research agenda and a disease list for progress on this topic, including the development of the disease list comprehensively consisting of health conditions where the productivity loss should be incorporated into economic evaluations. Conclusion An increasing number of guidelines recommend the inclusion of productivity loss in the base case or additional analyses of economic evaluation. We optimistically expect that more Chinese researchers notice the importance of incorporating productivity loss in economic evaluations and anticipate guidelines that may be suitable for Chinese practitioners and decision-makers that facilitate the advancement of research on productivity loss measurement and valuation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shan Jiang
- School of Population and Public Health, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Yitong Wang
- Public Health Department, Aix- Marseille-University, Marseille, France
| | - Lei Si
- The George Institute for Global Health, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Xiao Zang
- Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA
| | - Yuan-Yuan Gu
- Macquarie University Centre for the Health Economy, Macquarie Business School and Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Yawen Jiang
- School of Public Health (Shenzhen), Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Gordon G Liu
- National School of Development, Peking University, Beijing, China.,Institute for Global Health and Development, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Jing Wu
- School of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
8
|
Seleznova Y, Alayli A, Stock S, Müller D. Methodological issues in economic evaluations of disease prevention and health promotion: an overview of systematic and scoping reviews. BMC Public Health 2021; 21:2130. [PMID: 34801013 PMCID: PMC8605499 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-021-12174-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2021] [Accepted: 10/28/2021] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND We aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of methodological challenges in economic evaluations of disease prevention and health promotion (DPHP)-measures. METHODS We conducted an overview of reviews searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Database of Promoting Health Effectiveness Reviews, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and Database of Promoting Health Effectiveness Reviews (DOPHER) (from their inception to October 2021). We included both systematic and scoping reviews of economic evaluations in DPHP addressing following methodological aspects: (i) attribution of effects, (ii) outcomes, (iii) inter-sectoral (accruing to non-health sectors of society) costs and consequences and (iv) equity. Data were extracted according to the associated sub-criteria of the four methodological aspects including study design economic evaluation (e.g. model-based), type/scope of the outcomes (e.g. outcomes beyond health), perspective, cost categories related to non-health sectors of society, and consideration of equity (method of inclusion). Two reviewers independently screened all citations, full-text articles, and extracted data. A narrative synthesis without a meta-analysis or other statistical synthesis methods was conducted. RESULTS The reviewing process resulted in ten systematic and one scoping review summarizing 494 health economic evaluations. A lifelong time horizon was adopted in about 23% of DPHP evaluations, while 64% of trial-based evaluations had a time horizon up to 2 years. Preference-based outcomes (36%) and non-health outcomes (8%) were only applied in a minority of studies. Although the inclusion of inter-sectoral costs (i.e. costs accruing to non-health sectors of society) has increased in recent years, these were often neglected (between 6 and 23% depending on the cost category). Consideration to equity was barely given in economic evaluations, and only addressed in six of the eleven reviews. CONCLUSIONS Economic evaluations of DPHP measures give only little attention to the specific methodological challenges related to this area. For future economic DPHP evaluations a tool with structured guidance should be developed. This overview of reviews was not registered and a published protocol does not exist.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yana Seleznova
- Institute for Health Economics and Clinical Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital of Cologne, Gleueler Str. 176-178, 50935 Cologne, Germany
| | - Adrienne Alayli
- Institute for Health Economics and Clinical Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital of Cologne, Gleueler Str. 176-178, 50935 Cologne, Germany
| | - Stephanie Stock
- Institute for Health Economics and Clinical Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital of Cologne, Gleueler Str. 176-178, 50935 Cologne, Germany
| | - Dirk Müller
- Institute for Health Economics and Clinical Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital of Cologne, Gleueler Str. 176-178, 50935 Cologne, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
|
9
|
Cartwright K. Social determinants of the Latinx diabetes health disparity: A Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition analysis. SSM Popul Health 2021; 15:100869. [PMID: 34401459 PMCID: PMC8350406 DOI: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2021.100869] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2021] [Revised: 07/07/2021] [Accepted: 07/08/2021] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Latinx people living in the U.S. report a disproportionately high prevalence of diabetes. This project builds on the existing social determinants of diabetes literature by examining factors associated with a greater likelihood of diabetes and investigates factors correlated with the Latinx/non-Latinx disparity. This project studies the adult sample (18 and older) from the 2010–2018 IPUMS Health: National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data. Logistic regression analyses are used to examine the patterns between reporting Latinx identity and reporting diabetes with additional subgroup analyses of the Latinx and non-Latinx groups. Then, Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition is used to examine the patterns explaining the difference in self-reported diabetes between the Latinx and non-Latinx population for the whole sample and by age group. The logistic regression analyses show that after adjusting for age and other key social determinants of health, Latinx individuals are approximately 64.5% (OR 1.645, [95% CI, 1.536–1.760]) more likely to report being diagnosed with diabetes than non-Latinx individuals. Individual characteristics of age, race, and smoking behaviors are identified as suppressors of the gap, and conversely, characteristics of income, education, and BMI all contribute to the Latinx diabetes disparity gap. The Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition results show that the measured social determinants of health characteristics explain a meaningful amount of the Latinx diabetes gap. Importantly, differences in education and income (which are more immediately actionable policy areas) make larger contributions to the gap than BMI or other health behaviors.
The Latinx diabetes disparity should always presented after adjusting for age. In the age-adjusted model, Latinx adults are 64.5% more likely to report diabetes. Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition analysis shows how factors such as income, education, and BMI drive the diabetes disparity. Income and education are identified as modifiable factors to be prioritized in policy interventions aimed at reducing the diabetes disparity.
Collapse
|