Displaying all 2 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Besar Sa'aid H, Mathew S, Richardson M, Bielecki JM, Sander B
    Syst Rev, 2020 01 08;9(1):6.
    PMID: 31915067 DOI: 10.1186/s13643-019-1257-4
    BACKGROUND: Equity in health has become an important policy agenda around the world, prompting health economists to advance methods to enable the inclusion of equity in economic evaluations. Among the methods that have been proposed to explicitly include equity are the weighting analysis, equity impact analysis, and equity trade-off analysis. This is a new development and a comprehensive overview of trends and concepts of health equity in economic evaluations is lacking. Thus, our objective is to map the current state of the literature with respect to how health equity is considered in economic evaluations of health interventions reported in the academic and gray literature.

    METHODS: We will conduct a scoping review to identify and map evidence on how health equity is considered in economic evaluations of health interventions. We will search relevant electronic, gray literature and key journals. We developed a search strategy using text words and Medical Subject Headings terms related to health equity and economic evaluations of health interventions. Articles retrieved will be uploaded to reference manager software for screening and data extraction. Two reviewers will independently screen the articles based on their titles and abstracts for inclusion, and then will independently screen a full text to ascertain final inclusion. A simple numerical count will be used to quantify the data and a content analysis will be conducted to present the narrative; that is, a thematic summary of the data collected.

    DISCUSSION: The results of this scoping review will provide a comprehensive overview of the current evidence on how health equity is considered in economic evaluations of health interventions and its research gaps. It will also provide key information to decision-makers and policy-makers to understand ways to include health equity into the prioritization of health interventions when aiming for a more equitable distribution of health resources.

    SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This protocol was registered with Open Science Framework (OSF) Registry on August 14, 2019 (https://osf.io/9my2z/registrations).

  2. Hoenigl M, Salmanton-García J, Walsh TJ, Nucci M, Neoh CF, Jenks JD, et al.
    Lancet Infect Dis, 2021 Aug;21(8):e246-e257.
    PMID: 33606997 DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30784-2
    With increasing numbers of patients needing intensive care or who are immunosuppressed, infections caused by moulds other than Aspergillus spp or Mucorales are increasing. Although antifungal prophylaxis has shown effectiveness in preventing many invasive fungal infections, selective pressure has caused an increase of breakthrough infections caused by Fusarium, Lomentospora, and Scedosporium species, as well as by dematiaceous moulds, Rasamsonia, Schizophyllum, Scopulariopsis, Paecilomyces, Penicillium, Talaromyces and Purpureocillium species. Guidance on the complex multidisciplinary management of infections caused by these pathogens has the potential to improve prognosis. Management routes depend on the availability of diagnostic and therapeutic options. The present recommendations are part of the One World-One Guideline initiative to incorporate regional differences in the epidemiology and management of rare mould infections. Experts from 24 countries contributed their knowledge and analysed published evidence on the diagnosis and treatment of rare mould infections. This consensus document intends to provide practical guidance in clinical decision making by engaging physicians and scientists involved in various aspects of clinical management. Moreover, we identify areas of uncertainty and constraints in optimising this management.
Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links