Perspective | • The perspective of the analysis (which determines whose costs are included) should be clearly stated and justification provided. |
• For STH treatment programmes the costs of accessing treatment are normally negligible and therefore we recommend the use of a service provider’s perspective. However, if other interventions are also used (such as WASH) which may incur patient level costs the use of a societal perspective should be considered. | |
Output | • The results should clearly state the treatment frequency, target age group(s), method(s) of distribution and the reported coverage (stratified by age groups and treatment method). |
• For cost-effectiveness studies, the effectiveness metric(s) (such as cost per child treated, cost per health outcome averted) should be clearly stated and justified. | |
Resource identification | • Include the economic value of the time volunteered by teachers/community drug distributors (CDDs) and donated items: their time should be valued as the equivalent to their occupation had they not been volunteering calculated using local pay scales. |
• Exclude research costs. | |
• Include relevant overheads of collaborating organizations (e.g. non-governmental organizations (NGO) contributions). | |
• Clarify what management capacity is assumed to exist and whether the study is calculating an average cost of a programme or an incremental cost of adding an additional intervention within existing programme. | |
Resource measurement and valuation | • Where appropriate, account for integrated NTD control activities and shared resources between other control programmes, thereby indicating economies of scope. |
• For all capital items a discount rate of 3 % should be applied-to be consistent with the rate used by the World Bank [41]. This use of different discount rates (such as country-specific estimates) should be explored in the sensitivity analysis. | |
Sensitivity analysis | • To reflect the uncertainty in measurements a sensitivity analysis should be carried out on the main factors, including: discount rate, useful life of capital items, staff costs, fuel costs, and method used to value volunteers’ time. |
• Where it is necessary to estimate a share of resources contributed from other programmes or interventions (particularly in the context of integrated NTD control), the assumptions used should be subjected to sensitivity analysis. | |
Reporting of results | • Cost estimates should be provided in US$ and adjusted for inflation. |
• The cost year and exchange rates should be clearly stated. | |
• Clearly state whether costs are per treatment round or costs per year. | |
• Clearly state how the drugs were distributed (i.e. through schools by teachers and/or by CDD) and the number treated by each method stratified by age and school enrolment status (i.e. indicate how may school-aged children were treated by the CDD). | |
• Where possible indicate which costs were fixed and which variable. | |
• Provide costs stratified by individual programme activities (e.g. programme running costs, community sensitization, training, drug distribution and treatment, monitoring and evaluation). | |
• Provide costs stratified by resource type (e.g. personal, equipment, supplies, transportation and facilities). | |
• Report both the per capita total cost per treatment and delivery cost per treatment (as well as drug costs). | |
• Report the economic cost both with and without the value of donated drugs. | |
• Report the number treated each round (and coverage). | |
• When investigating more than one control strategy, details of how the costs/values of different programmatic activates were different should be provided and how shared costs have been attributed. |