CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 394HIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsHIV/AIDS Impact and ResponsesHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cost-effectiveness of HIV/AIDS interventions in Africa: a systematic review of the evidence

Creese, Andrew, Floyd, Katherine, Alban, Anita, Guinness, Lorna·2002·The Lancet
DOI 10.1016/s0140-6736(02)08595-1
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background Evidence for cost-effectiveness of interventions for HIV/AIDS in Africa is fragmentary. Cost-effectiveness is, however, highly relevant. African governments face difficult choices in striking the right balance between prevention, treatment, and care, all of which are necessary to deal comprehensively with the epidemic. Reductions in drug prices have raised the priority of treatment, though treatment access is restricted. We assessed the existing cost-effectiveness data and its implications for value-for-money strategies to combat HIV/AIDS in Africa. Methods We undertook a systematic review using databases and consultations with experts. We identified over 60 reports that measured both the cost and effectiveness of HIV/AIDS interventions in Africa. 24 studies met our inclusion criteria and were used to calculate standardised estimates of the cost (US$ for year 2000) per HIV infection prevented and per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) gained for 31 interventions. Findings Cost-effectiveness varied greatly between interventions. A case of HIV/AIDS can be prevented for $11, and a DALY gained for $1, by selective blood safety measures, and by targeted condom distribution with treatment of sexually transmitted diseases. Single-dose nevirapine and short-course zidovudine for prevention of mother-to-child transmission, voluntary counselling and testing, and tuberculosis treatment, cost under $75 per DALY gained. Other interventions, such as formula feeding for infants, home care programmes, and antiretroviral therapy for adults, cost several thousand dollars per infection prevented, or several hundreds of dollars per DALY gained. Interpretation A strong economic case exists for prioritisation of preventive interventions and tuberculosis treatment. Where potentially exclusive alternatives exist, cost-effectiveness analysis points to an intervention that offers the best value for money. Cost-effectiveness analysis is an essential component of informed debate about priority setting for HIV/AIDS.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0140-6736(02)08595-1

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Seven studies assessing prevention, notification, follow-up and treatment of infectious diseases demonstrated a consistently high ROI.

    “Seven studies assessed the prevention, notification, follow-up and treatment of infectious diseases such as hepatitis B and HIV. Overall, they demonstrated a consistently high ROI, reflecting the high disease burden of infectious diseases and the huge benefits of prevention.29”

    From Return on investment of public health interventions: a systematic review (2017) · cites this paper as [29]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 42 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Creese, A., Floyd, K., Alban, A., & Guinness, L.
Affiliations
  • World Health Organization (CH)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
ORCID
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-05
Volume
359
Issue
9318
Pages
1635-1642
ISSN
  • 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
  • 0140-6736
DOI
10.1016/s0140-6736(02)08595-1
OpenAlex
W2124497469
Cited by
394
References
42
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 10
FWCI
6.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • The Lancet (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › HIV/AIDS Impact and Responses
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
HIV/AIDS, cost-effectiveness, HIV prevention, antiretroviral therapy, prevention of mother-to-child transmission, tuberculosis treatment, transfusion safety, condom distribution, sexually transmitted infections, voluntary counseling and testing, disability-adjusted life years, priority setting, resource allocation, Africa
MeSH terms
Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome, Africa, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Female, Health Priorities, Humans, Male, Tuberculosis, HIV Infections, AIDS-Related Opportunistic Infections, Quality-Adjusted Life Years, Anti-HIV Agents

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review