↓ Skip to main content

Mortality changes after grants from the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria: an econometric analysis from 1995 to 2010

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
policy
3 policy sources
twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
Mortality changes after grants from the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria: an econometric analysis from 1995 to 2010
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2305-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Isabel Yan, Eline Korenromp, Eran Bendavid

Abstract

Since its founding in 2002, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria (Global Fund) has become the dominant multilateral health financier in low- and middle-income countries. The health impact of the Global Fund remains unknown because existing evaluations measure intermediate outcomes or do not account for preexisting and counterfactual trends. We conducted an econometric analysis of data from all countries eligible to receive Global Fund grants from 1995 to 2010, prior to and during the Global Fund's activities. We analyzed three outcomes: all-cause adult (15-59 years), all-cause under-five, and malaria-specific under-five mortality. Our main exposure was a continuous longitudinal measure of Global Fund disbursements per capita. We used panel fixed effect regressions, and analyzed mortality trends controlling for health spending, health worker density (a measure of health system capacity), gross domestic product, urbanization, and country fixed-effects. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: We find that following Global Fund disbursements, adult mortality rate declined by 1.4 % per year faster with every $10 per capita increase in disbursements (p = 0.005). Similarly, malaria-specific under-five mortality declined by 6.9 % per year faster (p = 0.033) with every $10 high per capita Global Fund disbursements. However, we find no association between Global Fund support and all-cause under-five mortality. These findings were consistent after subanalyses by baseline HIV prevalence, adjusting for effects of concurrent health aid from other donors, and varying time lags between funding and mortality changes. Grants from the Global Fund are closely related to accelerated reductions in all-cause adult mortality and malaria-specific under-five mortality. However, up to 2010 the Global Fund has not measurably contributed to reducing all-cause under-five mortality.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users 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 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
United States 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 68 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 24%
Student > Bachelor 11 15%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 15 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 19%
Social Sciences 8 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 19 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 41. 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 12 December 2020.
All research outputs
#911,235
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#968
of 15,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,781
of 276,828 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#18
of 271 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,466 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
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 276,828 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 271 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.