Literature DB >> 33531079

Country size bias in global health: cross-country comparison of malaria policy and foreign aid.

Tomas Jezek1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Foreign aid has been shown to be favourably biased towards small countries. This study investigated whether country size bias also occurs in national malaria policy and development assistance from international agencies.
METHODS: Data from publicly available sources were collected with countries as observational units. The exploratory data analysis was based on the conceptual framework with socio-economic, environmental and institutional parameters. The strength of relationships was estimated by the Pearson and polychoric correlation coefficients. The correlation matrix was explored by factor analysis.
RESULTS: Malaria burden is strongly correlated with GDP per capita, total health expenditure per capita, HDI; moderately with latitude, weakly with elevation, urban population share, per capita funding from the Global Fund, PMI USAID, UK government and UNICEF. Small country status is strongly correlated with population size, land area, island status; moderately with development assistance received per capita, weakly with funding per capita from Global Fund, government NMP and PMI USAID. Policy score 1, a variable derived from our factor analysis and related to malaria endemicity, is significantly strongly correlated with the malaria burden, moderately with HDI, GDP per capita, total health expenditure per capita, PMI USAID funding; weakly with island status, urban population share, latitude, coastal population share, total government expenditure and trade openness, Global Fund funding, World Bank funding, UK government funding, and UNICEF funding per capita. Policy score 2, which captures variation not related to malaria endemicity, is significantly weakly related to the ICRG index, PMI USAID funding per capita and small country status.
CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that malaria burden and economic development are bidirectionally related. Economic development can contribute to a reduction in the malaria burden. Country size does not negatively impact malaria burden, but it does account for greater development assistance per capita from selected international agencies. National malaria policy is associated with parameters related to public governance and is modified in small countries. Small country bias is present in the distribution of socio-economic resources and the allocation of foreign aid. Small countries are characterized by distinct environmental and socio-political properties.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Endemic diseases; Environment and public health; Global burden of disease; Global health; Health care economics and organizations; International agencies; Malaria

Year:  2021        PMID: 33531079      PMCID: PMC7856723          DOI: 10.1186/s41256-020-00176-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Glob Health Res Policy        ISSN: 2397-0642


  10 in total

Review 1.  The process of changing national malaria treatment policy: lessons from country-level studies.

Authors:  Holly Ann Williams; David Durrheim; Rima Shretta
Journal:  Health Policy Plan       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 3.344

2.  Epidemiology and (neo-)colonialism.

Authors:  P A Braveman
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 3.710

3.  Why do some countries spend more for health? An assessment of sociopolitical determinants and international aid for government health expenditures.

Authors:  Li-Lin Liang; Andrew J Mirelman
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2014-05-29       Impact factor: 4.634

Review 4.  Urbanization, malaria transmission and disease burden in Africa.

Authors:  Simon I Hay; Carlos A Guerra; Andrew J Tatem; Peter M Atkinson; Robert W Snow
Journal:  Nat Rev Microbiol       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 60.633

Review 5.  Climate change and threat of vector-borne diseases in India: are we prepared?

Authors:  Ramesh C Dhiman; Sharmila Pahwa; G P S Dhillon; Aditya P Dash
Journal:  Parasitol Res       Date:  2010-02-13       Impact factor: 2.289

Review 6.  The economic and social burden of malaria.

Authors:  Jeffrey Sachs; Pia Malaney
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2002-02-07       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 7.  The global distribution and population at risk of malaria: past, present, and future.

Authors:  Simon I Hay; Carlos A Guerra; Andrew J Tatem; Abdisalan M Noor; Robert W Snow
Journal:  Lancet Infect Dis       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 25.071

Review 8.  Shrinking the malaria map: progress and prospects.

Authors:  Richard G A Feachem; Allison A Phillips; Jimee Hwang; Chris Cotter; Benjamin Wielgosz; Brian M Greenwood; Oliver Sabot; Mario Henry Rodriguez; Rabindra R Abeyasinghe; Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus; Robert W Snow
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2010-10-28       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Mapping malaria risk and vulnerability in the United Republic of Tanzania: a spatial explicit model.

Authors:  Michael Hagenlocher; Marcia C Castro
Journal:  Popul Health Metr       Date:  2015-02-03

10.  Critical epidemiology in action: Research for and by indigenous peoples.

Authors:  Erica Prussing
Journal:  SSM Popul Health       Date:  2018-09-10
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.