Health policy
Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs
The study provides evidence that a country’s ability to reduce the gap in child-mortality rates is related to good governance.

The child-mortality gap has narrowed between the poorest and wealthiest households in a majority of more than 50 developing countries, a new study from the Stanford University School of Medicine has found.

This convergence was mostly driven by the fact that child-mortality rates declined the fastest among the poorest families. In the countries where the gap increased, the study identified a common thread: poor governance.

The findings provide important information for making decisions about prioritizing global health investments to effectively promote equity, said Eran Bendavid, MD, assistant professor of medicine, core faculty member at CHP/PCOR, and the study’s author.

The study, published online Nov. 10 in Pediatrics, analyzed data from nearly 1 million families living in 54 low- and middle-income countries to determine the relationship between mortality in children under the age of 5 and wealth inequality.

“In many countries, national wealth has increased hand-in-hand with increasing health inequality. That’s been a signature of our time,” Bendavid said. “It’s a pressing concern for many societies, especially in wealthy countries, but it’s also been an issue in low- and middle-income countries.”

Assessing child mortality within developing countries

Many studies have assessed the national child mortality trends in developing countries, but they say little about the mortality gap between the poorest and wealthiest within those countries. National trends could be associated with either narrowing or widening gaps between the poorest and wealthiest populations, Bendavid noted. For example, if child mortality decreases faster among the wealthy compared with the poor, the overall child-mortality rate in that country could decrease even as the mortality gap widens. Alternatively, if child mortality decreases faster among the poor, the health gap could narrow.

To fill this gap in knowledge, the study sought to understand whether developing countries are experiencing a widening or narrowing mortality-rate gap among children under 5 of the poorest and wealthiest families.

To compare wealth status and under-5 child mortality within a country, Bendavid used data from the demographic and health surveys for 1.2 million women living in 929,224 households in 54 developing countries. The women provided information about their children’s survival status. 

 “The people who conduct these surveys, they’re intrepid surveyors,” said Bendavid, who is also a core faculty member of Stanford Health Policy, which is part of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies. “They reach remote villages up the Congo basin and in the Sahel in Niger, and track the heads of households and women for these in-depth interviews.”

The surveys include information about each woman’s birth histories, including detailed birth registries documenting millions of children. With this information, Bendavid could estimate the probability of a child dying before reaching age 5 per 1,000 live births.

Tallying household possessions

Determining each household’s wealth status was not as straightforward as reviewing annual income and tax returns, which don’t exist in the countries involved in the study. “These surveys tally the possessions in the household. What is the floor made of? What is the roof made of?” Bendavid said. “You can get a wide distribution of household possessions that reflects to a large degree the household wealth.”

Next, Bendavid developed a three-tier wealth index using the household assets. The three wealth categories were relative — poorest, middle and wealthiest.

To analyze trends in wealth status and under-5 mortality, Bendavid looked at all developing countries that had completed the surveys in two specific time frames: 2002-07 and 2008-12. The study found that the under-5 mortality rates among the poorest groups had decreased the most rapidly. The average decline was 4.36 deaths each year per 1,000 live births among the poorest, 3.36 among the middle and 2.06 among the wealthiest. Because the poorest group’s mortality rate is decreasing more quickly that the other groups, the gap in child-mortality rates is closing.

This is good news, Bendavid said. However, not all countries followed this same trend. In a quarter of the surveys examined by the study, inequality in under-5 mortality increased over time.

Bendavid found that four factors were present in countries with a narrowing child-mortality gap: government effectiveness, rule of law, control of corruption and regulatory quality. He found that the difference in mortality rates was significantly associated with the governance score: Better governance scores were related to greater convergence in mortality rates among the three wealth groups.

Benefits from controlling communicable diseases

Bendavid said the evidence in this study is consistent with gains in controlling communicable diseases, such as malaria, measles, diarrhea and respiratory illnesses, that preferentially affect the poorest. Over the past decade, international health aid organizations have financed interventions for these diseases at a high rate.

It makes a persuasive case that these improvements have often begun to benefit the poor even more than the better-off.

“Dr. Bendavid’s study is an important contribution to knowledge about child health improvements in the developing world,” said Davidson Gwatkin, a senior fellow at the Results for Development Institute and a senior associate at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. “It makes a persuasive case that these improvements have often begun to benefit the poor even more than the better-off.” Gwatkin was not involved in the study.

The study also raises questions about the role of foreign aid institutions in low- and middle-income countries. While the aid efforts are making a difference in child-mortality rates in countries with effective governments, the study seems to show that this is not the case in nations with poor governance, Bendavid said.

“We have the technologies, we have the means, we have the know-how to reduce child mortality dramatically,” said Bendavid. “Even for such low-hanging fruit, however, implementation is not always easy. You have to have government that enables basic safety, and the ability to reach poor and rural communities that benefit from these kinds of programs.”

This work was supported by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (grant KOIAI084582), the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation and the Dr. George Rosenkranz Prize for Health Care Research in Developing Countries.

 Information about Stanford’s Department of Medicine, which also supported this research, is available at http://medicine.stanford.edu.

 

Hero Image
image img  full  high
All News button
1
-

Abstract:

The United States spends over 17 percent of GDP on health care; the next six highest countries spend over 11 percent. This six percent differential indicates an excess spending of approximately one trillion dollars per year. Depending on the benefit from the extra spending, this suggests the possibility of a huge misallocation of resources. Also, because the federal government funds almost half of total health care spending, there are significant effects on the deficit and the debt. The main reasons for the excess are (1) the U.S. pays higher prices for drugs, devices, and equipment and higher fees to specialists and sub-specialists; (2) higher administrative costs; and (3) a more expensive mix of medical care. The seminar will focus on institutional and political explanations for the three proximate reasons.

 

Speaker Bio:

Victor R. Fuchs is the Henry J. Kaiser Jr Professor Emeritus at Stanford University, in the Departments of Economics and Health Research and Policy.  He is also a Research Associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research and a Senior Fellow at SIEPR.  He applies economic analysis to social problems of national concern, with special emphasis on health and medical care.  He is author of nine books, the editor of six others, and has published over two hundred papers and shorter pieces.  His current research focuses on male-female differences in mortality, reform of medical education, and the future of U.S. health care.

His best known work, Who Shall Live?  Health, Economics, and Social Choice (1974; expanded edition 1998, 2nd expanded edition 2011), helps health professionals and policy makers to understand the economic and policy problems in health that have emerged in recent decades.  Other books include The Service Economy (1968), How We Live (1983), The Health Economy (1986), Women’s Quest For Economic Equality (1988), and The Future of Health Policy (1993).  He is the editor of Individual and Social Responsibility: Child Care, Education, Medical Care, and Long-term Care in America (1996).

Professor Fuchs was elected president of the American Economic Association in 1995.  He has also been elected to the American Philosophical Society, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, and is an Honorary Member of Alpha Omega Alpha.  He has received the John R. Commons Award, Emily Mumford Medal for Distinguished Contributions to Social Science in Medicine, Distinguished Investigator Award (Association for Health Services Research), Baxter Foundation Health Services Research Prize, and Madden Distinguished Alumni Award (New York University).  ASHE’s (American Society of Health Economists) Career Award for Lifetime Contributions to the Field of Health Economics and the RAND Corporation prize for the Best Paper published in the Forum for Health Economics and Policy are named and awarded in honor of Professor Fuchs.

This event is sponsored by the Stanford Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law and the Center for Health Policy/Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research.

 

CISAC Conference Room

Victor Fuchs the Henry J. Kaiser Jr Professor Emeritus Speaker Stanford University
Seminars
Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Millions of women in India give birth at home, where they don’t have easy access to medical help if things go wrong. And things go wrong often. The country has one of the world’s highest rates of maternal and neonatal deaths.

To curb this problem, the government pays eligible pregnant women to deliver their babies in an accredited medical facility. With both a financial incentive and the promise of a safer childbirth, it would stand to reason that most Indian women should choose to deliver their babies in a hospital.

But that’s not the case.

Most babies are still born in homes. Early numbers from the financial incentive programs show less than half of eligible women are choosing to participate.

Stanford researchers Grant Miller and Nomita Divi think the answer to this quandary—and so many other well-intentioned policies that fall short—needs to first be considered from the perspective of patients, doctors and other health care providers. And that, they say, is a different approach than most health interventions take.

Miller and Divi are spearheading the Stanford India Health Policy Initiative, a program that seeks to rethink health interventions based on Indian health care users’ and providers’ motivations for seeking care. And to get there, the initiative’s focus comes from the people who confront these problems every day.

The program, which is connected to the International Policy Implementation Lab at Stanford’s Freeman Spogli Institute, first brings together community leaders for an in-depth discussion of where best to focus efforts. Next, teams (including students) take these recommendations and spend several months conducting fieldwork to understand health care decision-making, both from the side of patients and providers.  From this foundation, the initiative produces reports detailing the behavioral motivations for why certain dimensions of health care are or are not working.

“To really understand why health policies succeed or fail, you have to see the world through the eyes of the providers and patients,” said Miller, an associate professor of medicine and a core faculty member of FSI’s Center for Health Policy and Primary Care Outcome Research. “A lot of programs are created because they seem logical from the outside. But if you don't understand a patient’s priorities or motives, your program may not work.”

Miller and Divi first applied this approach to the very issue of childbirth in India. Why weren’t more women giving birth in hospitals when there were seemingly logical reasons to do so?

Over the summer, Miller, Divi, their Indian partners, and Stanford graduate and medical students set out to answer this question. During seven weeks of field interviews and subsequent analysis, the students—with guidance from Miller and Divi —identified reasons for why Indian women weren’t accepting a stipend to have their babies in the hospital. Some of these reasons included hidden costs of delivering a baby (like the transportation cost to the hospital or unexpected medical expenses), pressure from mothers-in-law to follow tradition and deliver at home, and fear of unwanted medical procedures like Caesarean sections or sterilization.

This understanding of why patients and providers don’t always make seemingly logical health care decisions is exactly what the India Health Policy Initiative is after.

“So much academic research is driven by donors or journal articles that we read,” Miller said. “So it seemed like we were starting from the wrong place in identifying health policy challenges that we should work on.”

In January, Miller and Divi convened a group of Indian health policy leaders, health care workers, academics and entrepreneurs to understand the challenges they faced in their daily work, and what health care questions they would most like to know more about. From this two-day meeting, the group identified two focus areas for the India Health Policy Initiative over the coming year: understanding more deeply the motivations and activities of both formal and informal health care providers, and what Indians value about care from the informal sector. These informal providers are often doctors or nurses with little or no medical training that are used by many low-income Indians.

To help answer these questions and provide opportunities for students, the Stanford India Health Policy Initiative engages top students from across the university. “We want to provide our students with an experience that will hopefully shape the way they think in their future careers,” said Divi, the initiative's project manager. “And we try to achieve this by training our students to help make sense of urgent health delivery challenges, immersing them in an intensive field experience, and teaching them how to generate insights.”

To better understand providers’ motivations, as well as patients’ perspectives on both the informal and formal providers, Miller and Divi will work with this new team to carry out qualitative fieldwork this summer.

Miller explained that the approach is very anthropological.

”To be able to understand these issues, we all have to see the world through another person’s eyes, whether that be a formal or informal health provider or a patient,” he said. “This approach fundamentally relies on strong collaboration with Indian partners.”

The initiative’s teams will spend their weeks interviewing different health care providers and patients in a handful of Indian villages, taking copious notes and ultimately translating hundreds of interviews into findings.

Roshan Shankar, MS/MPP ’14, worked as part of the initiative’s team last summer, focusing on understanding pregnant women’s decisions about where to deliver their babies. After considering several summer internships with consulting firms and international organizations, Shankar declined these opportunities, instead opting to work with the Stanford India Health Policy Initiative.

Shankar is from New Delhi and has always planned to move back to his home country and work in government after school. He said the India Health Policy Initiative was a way to better understand his nation and the pressing challenges facing it.

“I’m used to sitting at a table and not venturing out,” Shankar said. “This experience showed me that things are much more different on the ground than on paper.”

After his work with the Stanford Health Policy Initiative, Shankar said he is now certain he wants to return to India and work in government.

“It was a humbling and enlightening experience. I think the way we did this entire analysis will affect the way I do any work there,” he said. “It will ensure that I do a more effective evaluation of the policies and programs that I work on, and start by going to see people who use them.”

The Stanford India Health Policy Initiative is supported by several organizations including the Center for Innovation in Global Health and the Office of International Affairs.

Teal Pennebaker is a freelance writer.

 

Hero Image
IMG 1365
Stanford medical student Bina Choi, center, interviews a woman about her pregnancy experience for the Stanford India Health Policy Initiative last summer. Choi is joined by colleagues from SIHPI partner organization the Institute of Socio-Economic Research on Development and Democracy.
Roshan Shankar
All News button
1
-

John W. (Jack) Rowe MD, an expert on health care economics and healthy aging, will be the inaugural speaker for the Stanford Center on Longevity Distinguished Lecture Series. Rowe is professor of health policy and management, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health and former CEO of Aetna Inc.

Rowe’s lecture, “Myths and Realities of an Aging Society,” will be from 6 to 7 p.m. (reception at 5:30 p.m.), Tuesday, April 13.

Frances C. Arrillaga Alumni Center

Columbia University, MSPH
Dept. of Health Policy & Mgmt.
600 West 168th Street, 6th Fl.
New York, NY 10032

0
Professor, Department of Health Policy and Management, Joseph Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University
jack_rowe.jpeg MD

Dr. John Rowe is the Julius B. Richmond Professor of Health Policy and Aging at the Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health.  Previously, from 2000 until his retirement in late 2006, Dr. Rowe served as Chairman and CEO of Aetna, Inc., one of the nation's leading health care and related benefits organizations.  Before his tenure at Aetna, from 1998 to 2000, Dr. Rowe served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Mount Sinai NYU Health, one of the nation’s largest academic health care organizations. From 1988 to 1998, prior to the Mount Sinai-NYU Health merger, Dr. Rowe was President of the Mount Sinai Hospital and the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York City.

Before joining Mount Sinai, Dr. Rowe was a Professor of Medicine and the founding Director of the Division on Aging at the Harvard Medical School, as well as Chief of Gerontology at Boston’s Beth Israel Hospital.  He was Director of the MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Successful Aging and is co-author, with Robert Kahn, Ph.D., of Successful Aging (Pantheon, 1998). Currently, Dr. Rowe leads the MacArthur Foundation’s Network on An Aging Society .

Dr. Rowe was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a member of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences. He  serves on the Board of Trustees of the Rockefeller Foundation and is Chairman of the Board of Trustees at the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, Massachusetts and the Board of Overseers of Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health. He is Chair of the Advisory Council of Stanford University’s Center on Longevity, and  was a founding Commissioner of the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission ( Medpac) and Chair of the board of Trustees of the University of Connecticut. 

Adjunct Affiliate at the Center for Health Policy and the Department of Health Policy
CV
Date Label
John (Jack) Rowe Speaker
Lectures

Encina Commons Room 225,
615 Crothers Way,
Stanford, CA 94305-6006

(650) 723-0970 (650) 723-1919
0
Vice Provost and Dean of Research
Professor, Health Policy
Professor, Law
rsd15_081_0469a.jpg LLB, ScD, MPH

David M. Studdert is a leading expert in the fields of health law and empirical legal research. His scholarship explores how the legal system influences the health and well-being of populations. A prolific scholar, he has authored more than 150 articles and book chapters, and his work appears frequently in leading international medical, law, and health policy publications.

Professor Studdert joined Stanford Law School faculty on November 1, 2013, in a joint appointment as Professor of Health Policy at the Stanford University School of Medicine, and Professor of Law.

Before joining the Stanford faculty, Professor Studdert was on the faculty at the University of Melbourne (2007-13) and the Harvard School of Public Health (2000-06). He has also worked as a policy analyst at the RAND Corporation, a policy advisor to the Minister for Health in Australia, and a practicing attorney.

Professor Studdert has received the Alice S. Hersh New Investigator Award from AcademyHealth, the leading organization for health services and health policy research in the United States. He was awarded a Federation Fellowship (2006) and a Laureate Fellowship (2011) by the Australian Research Council. He holds a law degree from University of Melbourne and a doctoral degree in health policy and public health from the Harvard School of Public Health.

CV
Date Label

Practice guidelines aim to guide physician practice according to the best available evidence.  Data were mixed regarding the impact of practice guidelines on physician prescribing. The researchers analyzed data from three national ambulatory care surveys to depict long-term trends in U.S.

The HIV/AIDS pandemic has decimated family life in Africa.  This project focused on the welfare of the “orphaned-elderly” – a class of elderly dependents whose traditional care-giving arrangements have collapsed. The authors presented their findings in January 2008. A manuscript, “HIV and Africa’s ‘Orphaned Elderly,’” was published in British Medical Journal. Another manuscript entitled, “The President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief in Africa: An Evaluation of Outcomes” was published in Annals of Internal Medicine.

Subscribe to Health policy