Dataset Information

A systematic review on health resilience to economic crises.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The health effects of recent economic crises differ markedly by population group. The objective of this systematic review is to examine evidence from longitudinal studies on factors influencing resilience for any health outcome or health behaviour among the general population living in countries exposed to financial crises.

Methods

We systematically reviewed studies from six electronic databases (EMBASE, Global Health, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science) which used quantitative longitudinal study designs and included: (i) exposure to an economic crisis; (ii) changes in health outcomes/behaviours over time; (iii) statistical tests of associations of health risk and/or protective factors with health outcomes/behaviours. The quality of the selected studies was appraised using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. PRISMA reporting guidelines were followed.

Results

From 14,584 retrieved records, 22 studies met the eligibility criteria. These studies were conducted across 10 countries in Asia, Europe and North America over the past two decades. Ten socio-demographic factors that increased or protected against health risk were identified: gender, age, education, marital status, household size, employment/occupation, income/ financial constraints, personal beliefs, health status, area of residence, and social relations. These studies addressed physical health, mortality, suicide and suicide attempts, mental health, and health behaviours. Women's mental health appeared more susceptible to crises than men's. Lower income levels were associated with greater increases in cardiovascular disease, mortality and worse mental health. Employment status was associated with changes in mental health. Associations with age, marital status, and education were less consistent, although higher education was associated with healthier behaviours.

Conclusions

Despite widespread rhetoric about the importance of resilience, there was a dearth of studies which operationalised resilience factors. Future conceptual and empirical research is needed to develop the epidemiology of resilience.

SUBMITTER: Glonti K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4408106 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A systematic review on health resilience to economic crises.

Glonti Ketevan K Gordeev Vladimir S VS Goryakin Yevgeniy Y Reeves Aaron A Stuckler David D McKee Martin M Roberts Bayard B

PloS one 20150423 4

<h4>Background</h4>The health effects of recent economic crises differ markedly by population group. The objective of this systematic review is to examine evidence from longitudinal studies on factors influencing resilience for any health outcome or health behaviour among the general population living in countries exposed to financial crises.<h4>Methods</h4>We systematically reviewed studies from six electronic databases (EMBASE, Global Health, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science) which us ...[more]

PMID: 25905629

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThe main objective of this study was to identify, describe, classify and analyze the scientific health economic evidence of VL-related technologies.MethodsA web search of combinations of free text and Mesh terms related to the economic evaluation of visceral leishmaniasis was conducted on scientific publication databases (Web of Science, Scopus, Medline via the Pubmed and Lilacs). A manual search of references lists of articles previously identified by the authors was also included. Articles written in English, Portuguese, Spanish or French were considered suitable for inclusion. Articles that matched the inclusion criteria were screened by at least two researchers, who extracted information regarding the epidemiologic scenario and methodological issues on a standardized form.ResultsThe initial search retrieved 107 articles, whose abstracts were inspected according to the inclusion criteria leading to a first selection of 49 (46%) articles. After the elimination of duplicates, the list was reduced to 21 (20%) articles. After careful reading and application of exclusion criteria, 14 papers were eligible according to the description, classification and analysis process proposed by the study. When classified by type of economic evaluation, articles were 7 (50%) cost-effectiveness, 5 (36%) cost-minimization, 1(7%) cost-benefit, and 1(7%) budget impact. When classified by methodology, studies were mainly nested to clinical-trials ("piggy back") 8(57%). Discount rates for outcomes and costs were present in 3 (43%) of the cost-effectiveness studies, and according to WHO's recommendations, the discount rate of 3% was used in all studies.ConclusionsThis article showed that health economic evaluations on visceral leishmaniasis used a wide range of technologies and methods. Nevertheless it is important to point out the geographic concentration of studies, which makes their transferability uncertain to different epidemiological scenarios, especially those concerning visceral leishmaniasis caused by Leishmania infantum.

Project description:BackgroundGlobally, the status of women's health falls short of its potential. In addition to the deleterious ethical and human rights implications of this deficit, the negative economic impact may also be consequential, but these mechanisms are poorly understood. Building on the literature that highlights health as a driver of economic growth and poverty alleviation, we aim to systematically investigate the broader economic benefits of investing in women's health.MethodsUsing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, we systematically reviewed health, gender, and economic literature to identify studies that investigate the impact of women's health on micro- and macroeconomic outcomes. We developed an extensive search algorithm and conducted searches using 10 unique databases spanning the timeframe 01/01/1970 to 01/04/2013. Articles were included if they reported on economic impacts stemming from changes in women's health (table of outcome measures included in full review, Table 1). In total, the two lead investigators independently screened 20,832 abstracts and extracted 438 records for full text review. The final review reflects the inclusion of 124 articles.ResultsThe existing literature indicates that healthier women and their children contribute to more productive and better-educated societies. This study documents an extensive literature confirming that women's health is tied to long-term productivity: the development and economic performance of nations depends, in part, upon how each country protects and promotes the health of women. Providing opportunities for deliberate family planning; healthy mothers before, during, and after childbirth, and the health and productivity of subsequent generations can catalyze a cycle of positive societal development.ConclusionsThis review highlights the untapped potential of initiatives that aim to address women's health. Societies that prioritize women's health will likely have better population health overall, and will remain more productive for generations to come.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Positive economic impact is a key decision factor in making the case for or against investing in an artificial intelligence (AI) solution in the health care industry. It is most relevant for the care provider and insurer as well as for the pharmaceutical and medical technology sectors. Although the broad economic impact of digital health solutions in general has been assessed many times in literature and the benefit for patients and society has also been analyzed, the specific economic impact of AI in health care has been addressed only sporadically. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to systematically review and summarize the cost-effectiveness studies dedicated to AI in health care and to assess whether they meet the established quality criteria. METHODS:In a first step, the quality criteria for economic impact studies were defined based on the established and adapted criteria schemes for cost impact assessments. In a second step, a systematic literature review based on qualitative and quantitative inclusion and exclusion criteria was conducted to identify relevant publications for an in-depth analysis of the economic impact assessment. In a final step, the quality of the identified economic impact studies was evaluated based on the defined quality criteria for cost-effectiveness studies. RESULTS:Very few publications have thoroughly addressed the economic impact assessment, and the economic assessment quality of the reviewed publications on AI shows severe methodological deficits. Only 6 out of 66 publications could be included in the second step of the analysis based on the inclusion criteria. Out of these 6 studies, none comprised a methodologically complete cost impact analysis. There are two areas for improvement in future studies. First, the initial investment and operational costs for the AI infrastructure and service need to be included. Second, alternatives to achieve similar impact must be evaluated to provide a comprehensive comparison. CONCLUSIONS:This systematic literature analysis proved that the existing impact assessments show methodological deficits and that upcoming evaluations require more comprehensive economic analyses to enable economic decisions for or against implementing AI technology in health care.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Health economic evaluations are essential to support health care policy and investment decisions. To date, health economic evaluations in orthotics and prosthetics have focused on discrete components of an orthosis/prosthesis (e.g. a microprocessor controlled prosthetic knee joint) rather than the broader service provided by orthotist/prosthetists. As such, the contribution to orthotic/prosthetic policy and investment decisions is unclear. Whilst there are opportunities to conduct more informative health economic evaluations that describe the costs and benefits of the orthotic/prosthetic service, it is important that prospective research is informed by a critical review of the method design challenges and an understanding of how this research can be improved. The aim of this systematic review is to critically appraise the existing orthotic/prosthetic health economic evaluation literature and therefore determine evidence gaps, critical method design issues and the extent to which the literature informs orthotic/prosthetic policy and investment decisions. METHODS:A comprehensive range of databases-AMED, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsychINFO, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and specialty health economic databases-will be searched using National Library of Medicine Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms as well as the title, abstract, and keyword terms. Search terms related to the intervention (e.g. orthosis), including variants used by varying professional disciplines (e.g. brace), will be used in preference to defining the populations that use orthotic and prosthetic services (e.g. people living with rheumatoid arthritis). Search terms related to health economic evaluations will be guided by previously developed and tested search strings and align with recommendations by the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Articles meeting the inclusion criteria will be hand-searched for relevant citations, and a forward citation search using Google Scholar will also be conducted to identify early online articles not yet indexed in traditional databases. Original research published in the English language and after 1 January 2000 will be included. The Checklist for Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) and the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria (CHEC)-Extended list will be used to appraise the methodological quality and identify sources of bias. Data extraction and appraisal will be conducted by one reviewer independently using appraisal instrument guidelines and a content specific decision aid with exemplars. A subsequent review by a second researcher will be undertaken to confirm the accuracy of the extraction and appraisal, and a final review by a third where consensus cannot be reached. The data will be extracted to a purpose-built data extraction template with decision-making guidelines to support consistency. Where possible, the findings of the review will be reported as a meta-analysis, although the heterogeneity of the literature will likely mean a narrative review that illuminates method design issues that contribute to imprecision and variation will be more appropriate. DISCUSSION:This protocol has been purposefully designed to summarise the existing evidence and appraise the methodological approaches used and the quality of the health economic evaluations in orthotics and prosthetics. What we learn from this review will be used to guide further work in this area and design more rigorous health economic evaluations into the future. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42018116910.

Dataset Information

A systematic review on health resilience to economic crises.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

A systematic review on health resilience to economic crises.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets