IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pgph00/0001666.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the cost-effectiveness of economic strengthening and parenting support for preventing violence against adolescents in Mpumalanga Province, South Africa: An economic modelling study using non-randomised data

Author

Listed:
  • William E Rudgard
  • Sopuruchukwu Obiesie
  • Chris Desmond
  • Marisa Casale
  • Lucie Cluver

Abstract

There is limited evidence around the cost-effectiveness of interventions to reduce violence against children in low- and middle-income countries. We used a decision-analytic model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of three intervention scenarios for reducing adolescent emotional, physical, and sexual abuse in Mpumalanga Province, South Africa. The intervention scenarios were: 1) Community grant outreach to link households to South Africa’s Child Support Grant (CSG) if they are eligible, but not receiving it; 2) Group-based parenting support; and 3) Group-based parenting support ‘plus’ linkage to the CSG. We estimated average cost-effectiveness ratios (ACERs) for intervention scenarios over a ten-year time horizon, and compared them to a South Africa-specific willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold (USD3390). Health effects were expressed in disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted. Our model considered four combinations of routine service versus trial-based costing, and population-average versus high prevalence of violence. Under routine service costing, ACERs for grant outreach and parenting support were below the WTP threshold when considering a population-average prevalence of violence USD2850 (Lower: USD1840-Upper: USD10,500) and USD2620 (USD1520-USD9800) per DALY averted, respectively; and a high prevalence of violence USD1320 (USD908-USD5180) and USD1340 (USD758-USD4910) per DALY averted, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness of parenting support plus grant linkage relative to parenting support alone was USD462 (USD346-USD1610) and USD225 (USD150-USD811) per DALY averted at a population-average and high prevalence of violence, respectively. Under trial-based costing, only the ACER for grant outreach was below the WTP threshold when considering a high prevalence of violence USD2580 (USD1640-USD9370) per DALY averted. Confidence intervals for all ACERs crossed the WTP threshold. In conclusion, grant outreach and parenting support are likely to be cost-effective intervention scenarios for reducing violence against adolescents if they apply routine service costing and reach high risk groups. Combining parenting support with grant linkage is likely to be more cost-effective than parenting support alone.

Suggested Citation

  • William E Rudgard & Sopuruchukwu Obiesie & Chris Desmond & Marisa Casale & Lucie Cluver, 2023. "Assessing the cost-effectiveness of economic strengthening and parenting support for preventing violence against adolescents in Mpumalanga Province, South Africa: An economic modelling study using non," PLOS Global Public Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(8), pages 1-19, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0001666
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001666
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0001666
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0001666&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pgph.0001666?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0001666. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: globalpubhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.