Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
5.4
Journals
IJERPH
Special Issues
The Cost-Effectiveness of Cross-Sectoral Obesity Prevention Interventions
ijerph-logo
Submit to IJERPH Review for IJERPH Propose a Special Issue

Journal Menu

► Journal Menu

Journal Browser

► Journal Browser
share announcement

The Cost-Effectiveness of Cross-Sectoral Obesity Prevention Interventions

A special issue of International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (ISSN 1660-4601). This special issue belongs to the section "Health Economics".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 January 2021) | Viewed by 9551

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Anita Lal

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Deakin Health Economics, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia
Interests: incorporating equity for socioeconomic status in economic evaluations; the economic evaluation of policies and interventions for the prevention of obesity; cancer and mental health conditions
Mrs. Jaithri Ananthapavan

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
Interests: health economics; economic evaluation of obesity prevention and treatment interventions; methods development in cost benefit analysis for preventive interventions

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The current obesity epidemic around the globe has significant negative health and economic consequences. Raised body mass index is a major risk factor for diseases such as cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, musculoskeletal conditions, and many cancers. These diseases not only cause premature mortality but also long-term morbidity. Over the last 15 years, there has been an increase in economic evidence to guide decision-making on obesity-related policy; however, the evaluations have focused on medical treatments such as pharmaceuticals and bariatric surgery rather than obesity prevention policies. Given the pervasiveness of the obesogenic environment we live in, action on obesity will require a comprehensive societal approach incorporating government intervention across various sectors including health, education, transport, agriculture, and action by private companies. More evidence is needed to confirm the return on investment of obesity prevention policies, not only within the healthcare sector, but also across other government sectors.

This Special Issue of the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, entitled “The Cost-Effectiveness of Cross-Sectoral Obesity Prevention Interventions,” offers an opportunity to publish high-quality research on the economic credentials of interventions outside the health care sector with a primary or secondary impact on obesity levels. We are particularly interested in papers that quantify the cross-sectoral impact of policies and their equity impacts.

Dr. Anita Lal
Mrs. Jaithri Ananthapavan
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2500 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • obesity prevention
  • economic evaluation
  • cost-effectiveness
  • policy analysis

Published Papers (3 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

11 pages, 956 KiB  
Article
Use of Economic Evidence When Prioritising Public Health Interventions in Schools: A Qualitative Study with School Staff
by Katie Breheny, Emma Frew, Iestyn Williams, Sandra Passmore and Joanna Coast
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(23), 9077; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17239077 - 04 Dec 2020
Viewed by 1830
Abstract
Schools are an ideal setting to deliver public health interventions, yet there are competing obligations that could limit their implementation. This study aimed to examine the decision making process and explore what evidence informs prioritisation of public health interventions in this setting. Semi-structured [...] Read more.
Schools are an ideal setting to deliver public health interventions, yet there are competing obligations that could limit their implementation. This study aimed to examine the decision making process and explore what evidence informs prioritisation of public health interventions in this setting. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 14 staff in seven UK schools between November 2017 and March 2018. Participants were recruited from schools participating in The Birmingham Daily Mile trial and comprised leadership staff, teachers, and pastoral staff. Analyses used a constant comparison approach to explore the prioritisation process and schools’ use of economic evidence. Teachers felt that they had little decision making influence in regard to public health interventions, with this falling on leadership staff. Participants perceived tension between delivering academic subjects and public health initiatives and thought proven impact was important to justify the opportunity cost. Evidence did not appear to be routinely used, and participants were unaware of cost-effectiveness analyses, but thought it could be a useful tool. This study shows that schools face challenges in balancing the academic, health, and wellbeing needs of children. There is a need for targeted evidence that includes appropriate costs and outcomes and meets school decision makers’ needs. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Cost-Effectiveness of Cross-Sectoral Obesity Prevention Interventions)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 727 KiB  
Article
What Is the Best Practice Method for Quantifying the Health and Economic Benefits of Active Transport?
by Holger Möller, Fiona Haigh, Rema Hayek and Lennert Veerman
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(17), 6186; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17176186 - 26 Aug 2020
Cited by 7 | Viewed by 3548
Abstract
The aim of this study was to identify a best practice method to cost the health benefits of active transport for use in infrastructure planning in New South Wales, Australia. We systematically reviewed the international literature covering the concept areas of active transport [...] Read more.
The aim of this study was to identify a best practice method to cost the health benefits of active transport for use in infrastructure planning in New South Wales, Australia. We systematically reviewed the international literature covering the concept areas of active transport and cost and health benefits. Original publications describing a method to cost the health benefits of active transport, published in 2000–2019 were included. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were assessed against criteria identified in interviews with key government stakeholders. A total of 2993 studies were identified, 53 were assessed for eligibility, and 19 were included in the review. The most commonly studied active transport modes were cycling (n = 8) and walking and cycling (n = 6). Exposures considered were physical activity, road transport related injuries and air pollution. The most often applied economic evaluation method was cost benefit analysis (n = 8), and costs were commonly calculated by monetising health outcomes. Based on evaluation of models against the criteria, a Multistate Life Table model was recommended as the best method currently available. There is strong and increasing interest in quantifying and costing the health benefits of active transport internationally. Incorporating health-related economic benefits into existing regulatory processes such as cost benefit analyses could provide an effective way to encourage the non-health sector to include health impacts in infrastructure measures. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Cost-Effectiveness of Cross-Sectoral Obesity Prevention Interventions)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

20 pages, 1507 KiB  
Review
A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations of Health-Promoting Food Retail-Based Interventions
by Huong Ngoc Quynh Tran, Emma McMahon, Marj Moodie and Jaithri Ananthapavan
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(3), 1356; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18031356 - 02 Feb 2021
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 3631
Abstract
Background: While the number of retail interventions with impacts on diet- and/or health-related outcomes is increasing, the economic evaluation literature is limited. This review investigated (i) the cost-effectiveness of health-promoting food retail interventions and (ii) key assumptions adopted in these evaluations. Methods: A [...] Read more.
Background: While the number of retail interventions with impacts on diet- and/or health-related outcomes is increasing, the economic evaluation literature is limited. This review investigated (i) the cost-effectiveness of health-promoting food retail interventions and (ii) key assumptions adopted in these evaluations. Methods: A systematic review of published academic studies was undertaken (CRD42020153763). Fourteen databases were searched. Eligible studies were identified, analysed, and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Results: Eight studies that evaluated 30 retail interventions were included in the review. Common outcomes reported were cost per healthy food item purchased/served or cost per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted. Four studies undertook cost-utility analyses and half of these studies concluded that retail interventions were cost-effective in improving health outcomes. Most studies did not state any assumptions regarding compensatory behaviour (i.e., purchases/consumption of non-intervention foods or food purchases/consumption from non-intervention settings) and presumed that sales data were indicative of consumption. Conclusion: The cost-effectiveness of retail-based health-promoting interventions is inconclusive. Future health-promoting retail interventions should regularly include an economic evaluation which addresses key assumptions related to compensatory behaviour and the use of sales data as a proxy for consumption. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Cost-Effectiveness of Cross-Sectoral Obesity Prevention Interventions)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-3
Back to TopTop