IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v101y2023ics0149718923001337.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methodological choices for an economic evaluation of a combined psychosocial and nutrition treatment intervention for children with severe acute malnutrition: The FUSAM trial in Nepal

Author

Listed:
  • Le Roch, Karine
  • Trenouth, Lani
  • Bizouerne, Cécile
  • Salpéteur, Cécile

Abstract

As a public health burden, severe acute malnutrition (SAM) among children has been increasingly studied to determine the optimal combination of treatment approaches. Among the new approaches is the addition of early childhood development sessions to standard nutrition-based treatment for SAM which can enhance both nutrition and development outcomes among young children. However, few studies demonstrate the relationship between the costs of such combined programs and the benefits accrued to the children and their caregivers. This article describes our experience of designing and conducting an economic evaluation alongside a cluster randomized controlled trial assessing a combined nutrition and psychosocial intervention for the treatment of SAM in children aged 6–24 months in Nepal. We present key lessons learned regarding methodological choices, the challenges of field data collection, as well as study adjustment when data analysis did not unfold as anticipated. With the view to transparency, this manuscript provides some clarifications on the evaluation processes for funders and policy makers on what economic evaluations entail and what information they convey for the purpose of supporting policy decision-making around limited resource allocation.

Suggested Citation

  • Le Roch, Karine & Trenouth, Lani & Bizouerne, Cécile & Salpéteur, Cécile, 2023. "Methodological choices for an economic evaluation of a combined psychosocial and nutrition treatment intervention for children with severe acute malnutrition: The FUSAM trial in Nepal," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:101:y:2023:i:c:s0149718923001337
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2023.102356
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718923001337
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2023.102356?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rogers, Patricia J. & Stevens, Kaye & Boymal, Jonathan, 2009. "Qualitative cost-benefit evaluation of complex, emergent programs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 83-90, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marcin Połom & Maciej Tarkowski & Krystian Puzdrakiewicz & Łukasz Dopierała, 2020. "Is It Possible to Develop Electromobility in Urban Passenger Shipping in Post-Communist Countries? Evidence from Gda?sk, Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-24, December.
    2. Maredia, Mywish K., 2009. "Improving the proof: Evolution of and emerging trends in impact assessment methods and approaches in agricultural development," IFPRI discussion papers 929, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Mihic, Marko M. & Todorovic, Marija Lj. & Obradovic, Vladimir Lj., 2014. "Economic analysis of social services for the elderly in Serbia: Two sides of the same coin," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 9-21.
    4. Alexei Botchkarev, 2016. "Essential notion of the health economic evaluation: Definition," Economic Analysis Working Papers (2002-2010). Atlantic Review of Economics (2011-2016), Colexio de Economistas de A Coruña, Spain and Fundación Una Galicia Moderna, vol. 2, pages 1-1, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:101:y:2023:i:c:s0149718923001337. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.