Journal of School of Public Health and

---

Background and Aim: Economic evaluation of health interventions is critical for efficient allocation of resources. The aim of this study was to critically review empirical studies on the cost-benefit of health interventions published over the last 40 years.

Materials and Methods: This study was carried out by searching seven  databases (PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of science, Science Direct, Scopus, Springer Link, and SID) using appropriate keywords to find articles on the cost-benefit of health interventions published during 1975-2015. All the relatedretrieved articles were analyzed after quality assessment using a valid check list.

Results: A total of 33studies on the cost-benefit of health interventions during the last 40 years were included in the review; 39%, 37%, 21% and 3%of the studies had been conducted in Asia, America, Europe and Africa, respectively. The subjects dealt with in most ofthe studies (79%) were related to immunization, education, healthy nutrition and use of health technologies. Further analysis of the data showed mental health education, healthy nutrition, use of safety equipment while driving, vaccination, diagnostic and screening tests, and oral and dental healthto have considerable clinical and economic benefits.

Conclusion: The number of studies on the cost-benefit analysis of health interventions is increasing. Preventive and promotive interventions can help planners and policy-makers to better utilize the limited resources in the health sector aiming at promoting health of the people.

---

Background and Aim: Economic evaluation of health interventions by comparing the relevant costs and benefits will result in optimum allocation of resources and increasing the effectiveness of the health system and, through improving equity and increasing accessibility to health services, will lead to increased effectiveness of the health system. The purpose of this study was to critically evaluate the Cost Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) studies on health interventions worldwide.
Materials and Methods: A critical review of the published CEA studies on health interventions was conducted. Seven databases including PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of science, Science Direct, Scopus, Springer Link, and SID were searched between 1975 and 2018, using appropriate keywords. The retrieved articles were evaluated using the Drummond (2005) quality assessment checklist. Overall, 173 articles met the entry criteria and were included in this study.
Results: CEA of health-related interventions were classified into six categories, namely, studies on immunization, education, nutrition, sexually transmitted diseases prevention, gynecological diseases prevention and vector-borne diseases and, eventually, cost-effective interventions were identified. Further analysis of the data showed that the methods used in health intervention CEA studies are very heterogeneous and lack sufficient scientific quality especially in developing countries. Researchers working in this area should pay more attention when designing studies and follow valid guidelines for CEA, particularly as regards research methods, sample size, CEA model, cost and benefit calculations, determining effectiveness, timeframe and, finally,  analysis of  the sensitivity and validity the research data.
Conclusion: The number of cost effectiveness analysis and cost utility studies has increased greatly during the last two decades. In order to improve the quality of these studies it is essential to revise the guidelines and procedures for economic evaluation of health interventions and train and update researchers in this area.