Health and Medicine

FSI’s researchers assess health and medicine through the lenses of economics, nutrition and politics. They’re studying and influencing public health policies of local and national governments and the roles that corporations and nongovernmental organizations play in providing health care around the world. Scholars look at how governance affects citizens’ health, how children’s health care access affects the aging process and how to improve children’s health in Guatemala and rural China. They want to know what it will take for people to cook more safely and breathe more easily in developing countries.

FSI professors investigate how lifestyles affect health. What good does gardening do for older Americans? What are the benefits of eating organic food or growing genetically modified rice in China? They study cost-effectiveness by examining programs like those aimed at preventing the spread of tuberculosis in Russian prisons. Policies that impact obesity and undernutrition are examined; as are the public health implications of limiting salt in processed foods and the role of smoking among men who work in Chinese factories. FSI health research looks at sweeping domestic policies like the Affordable Care Act and the role of foreign aid in affecting the price of HIV drugs in Africa.

-

Please note: All research in progress seminars are off-the-record. Any information about methodology and/or results are embargoed until publication.

Abstract:

The past two decades have witnessed an unprecedented expansion of investment in healthcare in developing countries with corresponding widespread improvement in health indicators, though there still remain a billion people without basic access to primary care. Though there is a growing emphasis on integrating international donor funds with broad-based health system strengthening (HSS) efforts, very little is known about the process in which healthcare systems improve at the point of service, and how that, in turn, impacts population health.   Unlike the role of randomized trials on individual interventions, there is no gold standard for health systems research.  As global health expands its scope to the new field of planetary health broadly associated with the SDGs, the gaps in knowledge and research grow even further. Here, we present a framework for adaptive district-level HSS in Madagascar.  The program simultaneously strengthens the WHO’s six building blocks of HSS at all levels of the health system within a government district, while pioneering a rigorous system for policy and implementation research that includes 1) strengthening the district’s health management information systems (HMIS); 2) a prospective longitudinal cohort demographic and health study of over 1500 households; and 3) selected qualitative and biomedical research projects.  The research platform allows for the evaluation of system output indicators as well as population-level impact indicators, such as mortality rates.  Moreover, it provides a platform for scientific research on socio-economic and environmental determinants of health that are fundamental to the new field of planetary health.

Matthew Bonds Harvard University
Seminars
-

All research in progress seminars are off-the-record. Any information about methodology and/or results are embargoed until publication.

Abstract:

The Vaccine Confidence Project (VCP) is a research group, led by Dr. Heidi Larson. The VCP studies the diverse sociocultural, political and psychological influences which affect confidence in vaccines and immunisation programmes in local settings worldwide, as well as examining trans-national influences. The VCP has developed multiple metrics to measure population confidence in vaccines and immunization programmes, from a survey-based Vaccine Confidence Index to temporal analysis of media and social media monitoring of vaccine sentiment  and local qualitative research to understand the drivers of vaccine reluctance and refusal. Together, these diverse metrics  generate a rich picture of the drivers of vaccine confidence to hep inform interventions.

While all the evidence points to the importance of understanding locally nuanced drivers of vaccine reluctance to inform interventions, Dr. Larson will talk about the equally important transnational impacts of local vaccine events and emotions through global cases studies on HPV, Polio, Flu and Ebola, and the implications for vaccine preparedness around newly introduced vaccines and programmes as well as pandemic preparedness.

Bio:

Heidi J. Larson, PhD,  is an anthropologist and Senior Lecturer, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, LSHTM, an Associate Clinical Professor, Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, and a Fellow at the Chatham House Centre on Global Health Security. Dr. Larson previously headed Global Communication for Immunisation at UNICEF and chaired the Advocacy Task Force for GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation). She was also a  member of the WHO SAGE working group dealing with vaccine hesitancy.   Dr. Larson’s research focuses on the analysis of the social and political factors that can affect uptake on health interventions, particularly vaccines, and the implications for policies and programmes. Her particular interest is on risk and rumour management from clinical trials to delivery – and building public trust. Dr. Larson is currently the Principle Investigator for a large European Union grant (EBODAC) on the deployment, acceptance and compliance of an Ebola prime-boost vaccine trial in Sierra Leone.

*This seminar is co-sponsored with the Stanford Center for Innovation in Global Health*

Heidi J. Larson
Seminars
-

Please note: All research in progress seminars are off-the-record. Any information about methodology and/or results are embargoed until publication.

Abstract:

Quantitative evaluation of environmental, health, and safety policies requires a metric for the value of changes in health risk. This metric should be consistent with both the preferences of the affected individuals and social preferences for distribution of health risks in the population. There are two classes of metrics widely used in practice: monetary measures (e.g., compensating and equivalent variations, willingness to pay and willingness to accept compensation) and health-utility measures (e.g., quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), disability-adjusted life years (DALYs)), both of which are summed across the population. Health-utility measures impose more structure on individual preferences than monetary measures, with the result that individuals’ preferences often appear inconsistent with these measures; for the same reason, health-utility measures help protect against cognitive errors and other sources of incoherence in estimates of the values of monetary measures obtained from revealed- and stated-preference studies. This paper presents theoretical and empirical evidence comparing these metrics and examining how they co-vary.

James Hammitt Harvard University
Seminars
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Nearly 100 health economists from across the United States signed a pledge urging U.S. presidential candidates to make chronic disease a policy priority. Karen Eggleston, a scholar of comparative healthcare systems and director of Stanford’s Asia Health Policy Program, is one of the signatories. 

The pledge calls upon the candidates to reset the national healthcare agenda to better address chronic disease, which causes seven out of 10 deaths in America and affects the economy through lost productivity and disability.

Read the pledge below.

Hero Image
gettyimages 497595451 Getty Images
All News button
1
News Type
Q&As
Date
Paragraphs

"What do I do about the chickens?"

When assistant professor of medicine Eran Bendavid began a study on livestock in African households to determine impact on childhood health, he'd already anticipated common field problems like poorly captured or intentionally misreported data, difficulty getting to work sites, or problems with training local volunteers.

But he'd never gotten that particular question from a fieldworker before. It didn't occur to him that participating families, in reporting their livestock holdings, would completely omit the chickens running around at their feet, thereby skewing the data.

"They didn't consider chickens to be livestock," recalled Bendavid. Along with Scott Rozelle, the Helen F. Farnsworth Senior Fellow at FSI, and associate professor of political science and FSI senior fellow Beatriz Magaloni, Bendavid spoke to a full house last week on lessons learned from fieldwork gone awry. The return engagement of FSI's popular seminar, "Everything that can go wrong in a field experiment” was introduced by Jesper Sørensen, executive director of Stanford Seed, and moderated by Katherine Casey, assistant professor of political economy at the GSB. The seminar is a product of FSI and Seed’s joint Global Development and Poverty (GDP) Initiative, which to date has awarded nearly $7 million in faculty research funding to promote research on poverty alleviation and economic development worldwide.

Rozelle, co-director of the Rural Education Action Program, spoke of the obstacles to accurate data gathering, especially in rural areas where record-keeping is inaccurate and participants' trust is low. Arriving in a Chinese village to carry out child nutrition studies, said Rozelle, "we found Grandma running out the back door with the baby." The researchers had worked with the local family planning council to find the names of children to study, but the families thought the authorities were coming to penalize them for violation of the one-child policy.

Cultural differences make for entertaining and illuminating (if frustrating) lessons, but Beatriz Magaloni, director of FSI's Program on Poverty and Governance at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law had a different story to tell. Over the course of three years, her GDP-funded work to investigate and reduce police violence in Brazil - a phenomenon resulting in more than 22,000 deaths since 2005 - has encountered obstacle after obstacle. Her work to pilot body-worn cameras on police in Rio has faced a change in police leadership, setting back cooperation; a yearlong struggle to decouple a study of TASER International’s body worn cameras from its electrical weapons in the same population; a work site initially lacking electricity to charge the cameras or Internet to view the feeds; and noncompliance among the officers. "It's discouraging at times," admitted Magaloni, who has finally gotten the cameras onto the officers' uniforms and must now experiment with ways to incentivize their use. "We are learning a lot about how institutional behavior becomes so entrenched and why it's so hard to change."

Experimentation is a powerful tool to understand cause and effect, said Casey, but a tool only works if it's implemented properly. Learning from failure makes for an interesting panel discussion. The speakers' hope is that it also makes for better research in the future.

The Global Development and Poverty Initiative is a University-wide initiative of the Stanford Institute for Innovation in Developing Economies (Seed) in partnership with the Freeman Spogli Institute (FSI). GDP was established in 2013 to stimulate transformative research ideas and new approaches to economic development and poverty alleviation worldwide. GDP supports groundbreaking research at the intersection of traditional academic disciplines and practical application. GDP uses a venture-funding model to pursue compelling interdisciplinary research on the causes and consequences of global poverty. Initial funding allows GDP awardees to conduct high-quality research in developing countries where there is a lack of data and infrastructure.

 

 

 

Hero Image
scott in field
All News button
1
Paragraphs
Abstract: 

This article reviews empirical evidence on the micro-level consequences of family planning programs in middle- and low-income countries. In doing so, it focuses on fertility outcomes (the number and timing of births), women’s health and socioeconomic outcomes (mortality, human capital, and labor force participation), and children’s health and socio-economic outcomes throughout the life cycle. Among the studies we reviewed, program effects ranged between 5 and 35 percent fewer children ever born and 5–7 percent longer births intervals. Relative to background fertility decline, however, real-world family planning programs explain only a modest share (about 4–20 percent of the total fertility decline among studies reporting significant effects). Family planning programs may also have quantitatively modest—but practically meaningful—effects on the socio-economic welfare of individuals and families.

 

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences
Authors
Grant Miller
Kim Babiarz
Paragraphs
Abstract: 

There is longstanding debate in population policy about the relationship between modern contraception and abortion.  Although theory predicts that they should be substitutes, the existing body of empirical evidence is difficult to interpret.  What is required is a large-scale intervention that alters the supply (or full price) of one or the other – and importantly, does so in isolation (reproductive health programs often bundle primary health care and family planning – and in some instances, abortion services).  In this paper, we study Nepal’s 2004 legalization of abortion provision and subsequent expansion of abortion services, an unusual and rapidly-implemented policy meeting these requirements.  Using four waves of rich individual-level data representative of fertile-age Nepalese women, we find robust evidence of substitution between modern contraception and abortion. This finding has important implications for public policy and foreign aid, suggesting that an effective strategy for reducing expensive and potentially unsafe abortions may be to expand the supply of modern contraceptives.

 

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Demography (conditionally accepted)
Authors
Grant Miller
-

Please note: All research in progress seminars are off-the-record. Any information about methodology and/or results are embargoed until publication.

Abstract:

The Norwegian universal health care system is built on the fundamental principle of equal access to high quality health services regardless of socioeconomic status, ethnicity and geographical residence. Norway (approx. 5 Million people) is recognized for being an overall top performer among OECD countries on various health measures. However, the aging population has led to substantial cost increases as well as long waiting times for elective surgery, due to insufficient ability of hospitals to absorb patient inflows. These were some of the main motivations for Norway’s Hospital Reform and the implementation of the Free Choice System in the early years following the millennium. The responsibility for financing and providing specialized health services was transferred to four Regional Health Authorities (Central State), which in turn were given the right to contract (usually by tendering competition) with Private For-Profit Hospitals (PFPs). In the Free Choice System, patients holding a referral from their general practitioner (GP) can choose any hospital, both PFPs and Non-Profit Hospitals, for the same out of pocket cost. We have previously found that PFPs deliver the same procedures at a substantially lower cost (down to 50.6% of the National DRG-price). However, due to relatively large variations in waiting times between PFPs and Non-Profit Hospitals, we hypothesized that some groups may be better at navigating in this new system and achieve lower waiting times. We were particularly interested in whether the reform, aimed to contain costs and reduce waiting time for elective surgery, has compromised the fundamental principle equal access to care. Patients who underwent day surgery during the period 2009 – 2014 were identified through the Norwegian Patient Register and linked with socioeconomic data using the Norwegian Tax Register and the Norwegian Education Register. Preliminary findings suggest that otherwise similar younger patients, poorer patients, and those with more comorbidities are less likely to use PFPs, using Non-profit Hospitals instead. Higher educated patients go more frequently to PFPs and the difference between lower educated and higher educated patients is increasing with longer waiting times. We also find an overall increasing secular trend to use PFPs.

BIO:

Geir H. Holom, MD, is a Visiting Scholar at Stanford School of Medicine (CHP/PCOR) from the University of Oslo. His research focuses on the expansion of private for-profit hospitals in the Nordic countries and its effect on prices, quality of care and selection of patients. He received a BSc in Economics and Business Administration from the Norwegian School of Economics and an MD from the University of Bergen. While in medical school, he conducted research on patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer who underwent head and neck reconstruction using microsurgery. Since receiving his MD, he has worked as a physician in both primary care and specialized health services. Prior to entering the field of medicine, he worked in the business and finance sector. Dr. Holom volunteers for the Children's Program at Oslo University Hospital.

Geir Holom
Seminars
-

Please note: All research in progress seminars are off-the-record. Any information about methodology and/or results are embargoed until publication.

Abstract:

This project aims to develop an index, composed of established and available social and economic measures, that provides a quantitative and reproducible estimate of the degree to which societies are currently adapting and likely will in the future adapt to the demographic transformation. Such an index, which currently does not exist, is required if we are to measure the degree of success, or failure, of policies designed to facilitate successful societal aging and thus provide a context that facilitates the capacity of older persons to access the health care and social and economic supports needed to function effectively.

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
Jack Rowe
-

Please note: All research in progress seminars are off-the-record. Any information about methodology and/or results are embargoed until publication.

Abstract

The United Nations endorses universal health coverage (UHC) as part of the Sustainable Development Goals as a mechanism to “ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all,” yet evidence about the impact of coverage on health in lower- and middle-income countries is limited. For example, if UHC improves survival then China’s dramatic expansion of health insurance coverage in rural areas since 2003 would have been expected to reduce mortality, especially among the rural poor; yet such impacts have not been found in research to date. 

We study whether insurance expansion played a causal role in adult mortality reductions in rural China. Our analysis uses Disease Surveillance Point (DSP) system data on age-standardized death rates per 1,000 population from 72 rural counties. We utilize differences across counties in the timing of the introduction of NCMS between 2004 and 2012 to show that NCMS reduced ischaemic heart disease mortality among elderly rural Chinese, with the most pronounced effects among men.

In collaboration with Maigeng Zhou, Shiwei Liu, Kate Bundorf, Sen Zhou

Shorenstein APARC
Stanford University
Encina Hall E301
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

(650) 723-9072 (650) 723-6530
0
Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Center Fellow at the Center for Health Policy and the Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research
Faculty Research Fellow of the National Bureau of Economic Research
Faculty Affiliate at the Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions
karen-0320_cropprd.jpg PhD

Karen Eggleston is a Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI) at Stanford University and Director of the Stanford Asia Health Policy Program at the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at FSI. She is also a Fellow with the Center for Innovation in Global Health at Stanford University School of Medicine, and a Faculty Research Fellow of the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). Her research focuses on government and market roles in the health sector and Asia health policy, especially in China, India, Japan, and Korea; healthcare productivity; and the economics of the demographic transition.

Eggleston earned her PhD in public policy from Harvard University and has MA degrees in economics and Asian studies from the University of Hawaii and a BA in Asian studies summa cum laude (valedictorian) from Dartmouth College. Eggleston studied in China for two years and was a Fulbright scholar in Korea. She served on the Strategic Technical Advisory Committee for the Asia Pacific Observatory on Health Systems and Policies and has been a consultant to the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, and the WHO regarding health system reforms in the PRC.

Director of the Asia Health Policy Program, Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center
Stanford Health Policy Associate
Faculty Fellow at the Stanford Center at Peking University, June and August of 2016
CV
Date Label
Karen Eggleston
Seminars
Subscribe to Health and Medicine