METHODS: To answer this demand, the Health Equity Assessment Toolkit (HEAT), was developed between 2014 and 2016. The software, which contains the World Health Organization's Health Equity Monitor database, allows the assessment of inequalities within a country using over 30 reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health indicators and five dimensions of inequality (economic status, education, place of residence, subnational region and child's sex, where applicable).
RESULTS/CONCLUSION: HEAT was beta-tested in 2015 as part of ongoing capacity building workshops on health inequality monitoring. This is the first and only application of its kind; further developments are proposed to introduce an upload data feature, translate it into different languages and increase interactivity of the software. This article will present the main features and functionalities of HEAT and discuss its relevance and use for health inequality monitoring.
METHODS: Various databases were used to search relevant articles since 1995. Studies included were cohort and cross-sectional studies, all patients with dengue infection and must report the number of death or case fatality rate. The Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal checklist was used to evaluate the risk of bias of the full-texts. The studies were grouped according to the classification adopted: WHO 1997 and WHO 2009. Meta-regression was employed using a logistic transformation (log-odds) of the case fatality rate. The result of the meta-regression was the adjusted case fatality rate and odds ratio on the explanatory variables.
RESULTS: A total of 77 studies were included in the meta-regression analysis. The case fatality rate for all studies combined was 1.14% with 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.82-1.58%. The combined (unadjusted) case fatality rate for 69 studies which adopted WHO 1997 dengue case classification was 1.09% with 95% CI of 0.77-1.55%; and for eight studies with WHO 2009 was 1.62% with 95% CI of 0.64-4.02%. The unadjusted and adjusted odds ratio of case fatality using WHO 2009 dengue case classification was 1.49 (95% CI: 0.52, 4.24) and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.26, 2.63) respectively, compared to WHO 1997 dengue case classification. There was an apparent increase in trend of case fatality rate from the year 1992-2016. Neither was statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: The WHO 2009 dengue case classification might have no effect towards the case fatality rate although the adjusted results indicated a lower case fatality rate. Future studies are required for an update in the meta-regression analysis to confirm the findings.