International Journal of Health Policy and Management

International Journal of Health Policy and Management

Impact of Health Research Systems on Under-5 Mortality Rate: A Trend Analysis

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Bahareh Yazdizadeh 1
Mahboubeh Parsaeian 2
Reza Majdzadeh 1, 2
Sima Nikooee 1
1 Knowledge Utilization Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2 Epidemiology and Biostatistics Department, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
10.15171/ijhpm.2016.147
Abstract
Background
Between 1990 and 2015, under-5 mortality rate (U5MR) declined by 53%, from an estimated rate of 91 deaths per 1000 live births to 43, globally. The aim of this study was to determine the share of health research systems in this decrease alongside other influential factors.
 
Methods
We used random effect regression models including the ‘random intercept’ and ‘random intercept and random slope’ models to analyze the panel data from 1990 to 2010. We selected the countries with U5MRs falling between the first and third quartiles in 1990. We used both the total articles (TA) and the number of child-specific articles (CSA) as a proxy of the health research system. In order to account for the impact of other factors, measles vaccination coverage (MVC) (as a proxy of health system performance), gross domestic product (GDP), human development index (HDI), and corruption perception index (CPI) (as proxies of development), were embedded in the model.
 
Results
Among all the models, ‘the random intercept and random slope models’ had lower residuals. The same variables of CSA, HDI, and time were significant and the coefficient of CSA was estimated at -0.17; meaning, with the addition of every 100 CSA, the rate of U5MR decreased by 17 per 1000 live births.
 
Conclusion
Although the number of CSA has contributed to the reduction of U5MR, the amount of its contribution is negligible compared to the countries’ development. We recommend entering different types of researches into the model separately in future research andincluding the variable of ‘exchange between knowledge generator and user.’
Keywords
Under-Five Mortality Rate (U5MR)
Research Impact Assessment
Research Payback
Research
Contribution
Subjects

Supplementary File 1 (Download)

  1.  

    1. Under-five mortality. WHO website.  http://www.who.int/gho/child_health/mortality/mortality_under_five_text/en/. Accessed August 1, 2016.
    2. Remme JH, Adam T, Becerra-Posada F, et al. Defining research to improve health systems. PLoS Med. 2010;7(11):e1001000. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001000
    3. World Health Organization (WHO). The world health report 2013: research for universal health coverage. Luxembourg: WHO; 2013.
    4. Yazdizadeh B, Majdzadeh R, Salmasian H. Systematic review of methods for evaluating healthcare research economic impact. Health Res Policy Syst. 2010;8:6. doi:10.1186/1478-4505-8-6
    5. Buxton M, Hanney S. How can payback from health services research be assessed? J Health Serv Res Policy. 1996;1(1):35-43.
    6. Buxton MJ, Hanney S. Developing and applying the Payback Framework to assess the socioeconomic impact of health research. Med Clin (Barc). 2008;131 Suppl 5:36-41. doi:10.1016/S0025-7753(08)76405-4
    7. Guthrie S, Pollitt A, Hanney S, Grant J. Investigating time lags and attribution in the translation of cancer research, a case study approach: RAND Europe, Health Economics Research Group,  King’s College London; 2012.
    8. Fayissa B, Gutema P. Estimating a health production function for Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Appl Econ. 2005;37(155):164.
    9. Nedjat S, Nedjat S, Maleki K, Gholami J, Ashoorkhani M, Majdzadeh R. Methodologies and messages in Iranian articles on maternal care, diabetes mellitus, and tuberculosis, published in 2001-2006. Int J Prev Med. 2012;3(1):42-46.
    10. The Millennium Development Goals Report. New York: United Nations; 2010.
    11. GDP per capita (constant 2010 US$). The World Bank website. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.KD. Accessed August 1, 2016.
    12. United Nations Development Programm, Human Development Reports.  http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi. Accessed August 1, 2016.
    13. Hawthorne O. Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index: ‘best flawed’ measure on Corruption? Paper presented at: The 3rd Global Conference on Transparency Research; October 24-26, 2013;  HEC Paris.
    14. Exceptional returns: the value of investing in health R&D in Australia. Canberra: Prepared for the Australian Society for Medical Research by Access Economics; 2003.
    15. Exceptional Returns The Value of Investing in Health R&D in Australia II. The Australian Society for Medical Research; 2008.
    16. The Economic Value of Australia’s Investment in Health and Medical Research:Reinforcing the Evidence for Exceptional Returns. A paper commissioned by Research Australia; 2010.
    17. Medical Research: What’s it worth? Estimating the economic benefits from medical research in the UK. Health Economics Research Group (HERG) Brunel University, Office of Health Economics (OHE), RAND Europe For the Medical Research Council, the Wellcome Trust and the Academy of Medical Sciences; 2008.
    18. Exceptional Returns: The Economic Value of America’s Investment in Medical Research. New York: Funding First; 2000.
    19. Glover M, Buxton M, Guthrie S, Hanney S, Pollitt A, Grant J. Estimating the returns to UK publicly funded cancer-related research in terms of the net value of improved health outcomes. BMC Med. 2014;12:99. doi:10.1186/1741-7015-12-99
    20. Cox D, Cozzens S, Ark GV, McAuley L, Borbey P. Evaluation of impacts of medical research. Swedish Research Council; 2010.
    21. Goldhaber-Fiebert JD, Lipsitch M, Mahal A, Zaslavsky AM, Salomon JA. Quantifying child mortality reductions related to measles vaccination. PLoS One. 2010;5(11):e13842. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0013842
    22. Noorbaksh F. The human development index: some technical issues and alternative indices. J Int Dev. 1998;10:589-605.
    23. Sahel JA. Quality versus quantity: assessing individual research performance. Sci Transl Med. 2011;3(84):84cm13. doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3002249
    24. Moed HF. New developments in the use of citation analysis in research evaluation. Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz). 2009;57(1):13-18. doi:10.1007/s00005-009-0001-5
    25. Derrick GE, Haynes A, Chapman S, Hall WD. The association between four citation metrics and peer rankings of research influence of Australian researchers in six fields of public health. PLoS One. 2011;6(4):e18521. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0018521
    26. Tracking Progress in Child Survival: The 2005 Report. The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF); 2005.
    27. Bryce J, el Arifeen S, Pariyo G, Lanata C, Gwatkin D, Habicht JP. Reducing child mortality: can public health deliver? Lancet. 2003;362(9378):159-164.
    28. Murray CJL, Evans DB. Health Systems Performance Assessment: Debates, Methods and Empiricism. World Health Organization; 2003.
International Journal of Health Policy and Management
Volume 6, Issue 7
2017
Pages 395-402

  • Received Date 11 December 2015
  • Revised Date 19 November 2016
  • Accepted Date 19 November 2016
  • First Published Date 01 July 2017
  • Published Date 01 July 2017