IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/hecrev/v5y2015i1p1-1410.1186-s13561-015-0071-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quality assessment of economic evaluations of health promotion programs for children and adolescents—a systematic review using the example of physical activity

Author

Listed:
  • Katharina Korber

Abstract

An increasing number of primary prevention programs aimed at promoting physical exercise in children and adolescents are being piloted. As resources are limited, it is important to ascertain the costs and benefits of such programs. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the currently available evidence on the cost-effectiveness of programs encouraging physical activity in children and adolescents and to assess their quality. A systematic review was conducted searching in well established literature databases considering all studies before February 2015. Citation tracking in Google Scholar and a manual search of the reference lists of included studies were used to consolidate this. The fundamental methodological elements of the included economic evaluations were extracted, and the quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Pediatric Quality Appraisal Questionnaire (PQAQ). In total, 14 studies were included. Considering the performance of the economic evaluation, the studies showed wide variation. Most of the studies used a societal perspective for their analyses and discounted costs and effects. The findings ranged from US$11.59 for a person to become more active (cheapest intervention) up to US$669,138 for a disability adjusted life year (DALY) saved (most expensive intervention), with everything in between. Overall, the results of three studies are below a value of US$3061, with one of them even below US$200.00, for the achieved effects. For the other programs, the context-specific assessment of cost-effectiveness is problematic as there are different thresholds for cost-effectiveness in different countries or no clearly defined thresholds at all. There are multiple methodological difficulties involved in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of interventions aimed at increasing physical activity, which results in little consistency between different evaluations. The quality of the evaluations ranged from poor to excellent while a large majority of them was of very good methodological quality. Better comparability could be reached by greater standardization, especially regarding systematic consideration of implementation costs. Copyright Korber. 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Katharina Korber, 2015. "Quality assessment of economic evaluations of health promotion programs for children and adolescents—a systematic review using the example of physical activity," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1-14, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:hecrev:v:5:y:2015:i:1:p:1-14:10.1186/s13561-015-0071-5
    DOI: 10.1186/s13561-015-0071-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1186/s13561-015-0071-5
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1186/s13561-015-0071-5?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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mandana Zanganeh & Peymane Adab & Bai Li & Emma Frew, 2019. "A Systematic Review of Methods, Study Quality, and Results of Economic Evaluation for Childhood and Adolescent Obesity Intervention," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-14, February.
    2. John Paul Ekwaru & Arto Ohinmaa & Bach Xuan Tran & Solmaz Setayeshgar & Jeffrey A Johnson & Paul J Veugelers, 2017. "Cost-effectiveness of a school-based health promotion program in Canada: A life-course modeling approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-13, May.

    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:spr:hecrev:v:5:y:2015:i:1:p:1-14:10.1186/s13561-015-0071-5. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/13561 .

    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.