↓ Skip to main content

Optimizing treatment for the prevention of pre-eclampsia/eclampsia in Nepal: is calcium supplementation during pregnancy cost-effective?

Overview of attention for article published in Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
140 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Optimizing treatment for the prevention of pre-eclampsia/eclampsia in Nepal: is calcium supplementation during pregnancy cost-effective?
Published in
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12962-016-0062-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Isabelle Feldhaus, Amnesty E. LeFevre, Chandra Rai, Jona Bhattarai, Deirdre Russo, Barbara Rawlins, Pushpa Chaudhary, Kusum Thapa

Abstract

In Nepal, pre-eclampsia/eclampsia (PE/E) causes an estimated 21% of maternal deaths annually and contributes to adverse neonatal birth outcomes. Calcium supplementation has been shown to reduce the risk of PE/E for pregnant women and preterm birth. This study presents findings from a cost-effectiveness analysis of a pilot project, which provided calcium supplementation through the public sector to pregnant women during antenatal care for PE/E prevention as compared to existing PE/E management in Nepal. Economic costs were assessed from program and societal perspectives for the May 2012 to August 2013 analytic time horizon, drawing from implementing partner financial records and the literature. Effects were calculated as disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted for mothers and newborns. A decision tree was used to model the cost-effectiveness of three strategies delivered through the public sector: (i) calcium supplementation in addition to the existing standard of care (MgSO4); (ii) standard of care, and (iii) no treatment. Uncertainty was assessed using one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses in TreeAge Pro. The costs to start-up calcium introduction in addition to MgSO4 were $44,804, while the costs to support ongoing program implementation were $72,852. Collectively, these values correspond to a program cost per person per year of $0.44. The calcium program corresponded to a societal cost per DALY averted of $25.33 ($25.22-29.50) when compared against MgSO4 treatment. Primary cost drivers included rate for facility delivery, costs associated with hospitalization, and the probability of developing PE/E. The addition of calcium to the standard of care corresponds to slight increases in effect and cost, and has a 84% probability of cost-effectiveness above a WTP threshold of $40 USD when compared to the standard of care alone. Calcium supplementation for pregnant mothers for prevention of PE/E provided with MgSO4 for treatment holds promise for the cost-effective reduction of maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality associated with PE/E. The findings of this study compare favorably with other low-cost, high priority interventions recommended for South Asia. Additional research is recommended to improve the rigor of evidence available on the treatment strategies and health outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 140 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 19%
Student > Bachelor 18 13%
Researcher 15 11%
Student > Postgraduate 11 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 6%
Other 19 14%
Unknown 43 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 17%
Social Sciences 9 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 46 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 January 2017.
All research outputs
#20,376,559
of 22,925,760 outputs
Outputs from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#398
of 428 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#355,841
of 421,250 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,925,760 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 428 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,250 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.