Objectives: Within health economic studies, it is often necessary to adjust costs obtained from different time periods for inflation. Nevertheless, many studies do not report the methods used for this in sufficient detail. In this article, we outline the principal methods used to adjust for inflation, with a focus on studies relating to healthcare interventions in low-and middle-income countries. We also discuss issues relating to converting local currencies to international dollars and US$ and adjusting cost data collected from other countries or previous studies. Methods: We outlined the 3 main methods used to adjust for inflation for studies in these settings: exchanging the local currency to US$ or international dollars and then inflating using US inflation rates (method 1); inflating the local currency using local inflation rates and then exchanging to US$ or international dollars (method 2); splitting the costs into tradable and nontradable resources and using method 1 on the tradable resources and method 2 on the nontradable resources (method 3).

The age-standardised prevalence of blindness and MSVI decreased substantially from 1990 to 2010, although there was a moderate increase in the absolute numbers with blindness or MSVI. Significant subregional and gender disparities exist.

Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) programmes are used to collect data which are required to assess the impact of current interventions on their progress towards achieving the World Health Organization (WHO) goals of morbidity control and elimination as a public health problem for schistosomiasis. Prevalence and intensity of infection data are typically collected from school-aged children (SAC) as they are relatively easy to sample and are thought to be most likely to be infected by schistosome parasites. However, adults are also likely to be infected. We use three different age-intensity profiles of infection for Schistosoma mansoni with low, moderate and high burdens of infection in adults to investigate how the age distribution of infection impacts the mathematical model generated recommendations of the preventive chemotherapy coverage levels required to achieve the WHO goals. We find that for moderate prevalence regions, regardless of the burden of infection in adults, treating SAC only may achieve the WHO goals. However, for high prevalence regions with a high burden of infection in adults, adult treatment is required to meet the WHO goals. Hence, we show that the optimal treatment strategy for a defined region requires consideration of the burden of infection in adults as it cannot be based solely on the prevalence of infection in SAC. Although past epidemiological data have informed mathematical models for the transmission and control of schistosome infections, more accurate and detailed data are required from M&E programmes to accurately determine the optimal treatment strategy for a defined region. We highlight the importance of collecting prevalence and intensity of infection data from a broader age-range, specifically the inclusion of adult data at baseline (prior to treatment) and throughout the treatment programme if possible, rather than SAC only, to accurately determine the treatment strategy for a defined region. Furthermore, we discuss additional epidemiological data, such as individual longitudinal adherence to treatment, that should ideally be collected in M&E programmes.

Economic evidence is increasingly being used for informing health policies. However, the underlining principles of health economic analyses are not always fully understood by non-health economists, and inappropriate types of analyses, as well as inconsistent methodologies, may be being used for informing health policy decisions. In addition, there is a lack of open access information and methodological guidance targeted to public health professionals, particularly those based in low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings. The objective of this review is to provide a comprehensive and accessible introduction to economic evaluations for public health professionals with a focus on LMIC settings. We cover the main principles underlining the most common types of full economic evaluations used in healthcare decision making in the context of priority setting (namely cost-effectiveness/cost-utility analyses, cost-benefit analyses), and outline their key features, strengths and weaknesses. It is envisioned that this will help those conducting such analyses, as well as stakeholders that need to interpret their output, gain a greater understanding of these methods and help them select/distinguish between the different approaches. In particular, we highlight the need for greater awareness of the methods used to place a monetary value on the health benefits of interventions, and the potential for such estimates to be misinterpreted. Specifically, the economic benefits reported are typically an approximation, summarising the health benefits experienced by a population monetarily in terms of individual preferences or potential productivity gains, rather than actual realisable or fiscal monetary benefits to payers or society.