SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

vol.1 issue1Review of delivery strategies for insecticide treated mosquito nets: are we ready for the next phase of malaria control efforts? author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing

On-line version ISSN 2078-8606


THIEDE, Michael H.  and  CASTILLO-RIQUELME, Marianela. How pro-poor are infectious disease programmes?. [online]. 2010, vol.1, n.1, pp. 0-0. ISSN 2078-8606.

BACKGROUND: Poor and deprived groups benefit less from preventive and curative interventions than the general population, despite the availability of a range of interventions that are generally considered effective. OBJECTIVES: This review assesses the evidence on the degree to which infectious disease programmes benefit the poor and the mechanisms that potentially determine pro-poor effectiveness. METHODS: A combination of search strings was used to identify infectious diseases studies that describe programmes targeted on the poor in MEDLINE and ScienceDirect databases. An additional online search was conducted in Google Scholar. Further literature and research reports were retrieved by reference tracking ("snowballing") and upon recommendation from experts. The literature was reviewed independently by the authors in a two-step process. The findings of the extremely diverse set of studies were extracted and conclusions drawn after a series of discussions with colleagues in the field. REUSLTS: 89 studies were selected on the basis of previously agreed inclusion and exclusion criteria. Hardly any evidence was found on programmes with a particular focus on the poorest and most vulnerable beyond malaria, TB, and HIV/AIDS. CONCLUSION:  Our review demonstrates that the pro-poor effectiveness of infectious disease interventions has neither been a priority in programme development nor has it been addressed articulately in research. In order for an infectious disease programme to be considered pro-poor, the endpoints should be measurable as long-term health gains for the poor and vulnerable. Programmes designed as integrated approaches addressing environmental factors, health risks, health care and poverty alleviation have the most potential to yield pro-poor outcomes.

        · text in English     · pdf in English