School-based socio-emotional learning programs to prevent depression, anxiety and suicide among adolescents: a global cost-effectiveness analysis.

AIMS: Preventing the occurrence of depression/anxiety and suicide during adolescence can lead to substantive health gains over the course of an individual person's life. This study set out to identify the expected population-level costs and health impacts of implementing universal and indicated school-based socio-emotional learning (SEL) programs in different country contexts. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to examine the effectiveness of delivering universal and indicated school-based SEL programs to prevent the onset of depression/anxiety and suicide deaths among adolescents. Intervention health impacts were measured in healthy life years gained (HLYGs) over a 100-year time horizon. Country-specific intervention costs were calculated and denominated in 2017 international dollars (2017 I$) under a health systems perspective. Cost-effectiveness findings were subsequently expressed in terms of I$ per HLYG. Analyses were conducted on a group of 20 countries from different regions and income levels, with final results aggregated and presented by country income group - that is, low and lower middle income countries (LLMICs) and upper middle and high-income countries (UMHICs). Uncertainty and sensitivity analyses were conducted to test model assumptions. RESULTS: Implementation costs ranged from an annual per capita investment of I$0.10 in LLMICs to I$0.16 in UMHICs for the universal SEL program and I$0.06 in LLMICs to I$0.09 in UMHICs for the indicated SEL program. The universal SEL program generated 100 HLYGs per 1 million population compared to 5 for the indicated SEL program in LLMICs. The cost per HLYG was I$958 in LLMICS and I$2,006 in UMHICs for the universal SEL program and I$11,123 in LLMICs and I$18,473 in UMHICs for the indicated SEL program. Cost-effectiveness findings were highly sensitive to variations around input parameter values involving the intervention effect sizes and the disability weight used to estimate HLYGs. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this analysis suggest that universal and indicated SEL programs require a low level of investment (in the range of I$0.05 to I$0.20 per head of population) but that universal SEL programs produce significantly greater health benefits at a population level and therefore better value for money (e.g., less than I$1,000 per HLYG in LLMICs). Despite producing fewer population-level health benefits, the implementation of indicated SEL programs may be justified as a means of reducing population inequalities that affect high-risk populations who would benefit from a more tailored intervention approach.

The cost-effectiveness of banning highly hazardous pesticides to prevent suicides due to pesticide self-ingestion across 14 countries: an economic modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Reducing suicides is a key Sustainable Development Goal target for improving global health. Highly hazardous pesticides are among the leading causes of death by suicide in low-income and middle-income countries. National bans of acutely toxic highly hazardous pesticides have led to substantial reductions in pesticide-attributable suicides across several countries. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of implementing national bans of highly hazardous pesticides to reduce the burden of pesticide suicides. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to examine the costs and health effects of implementing a national ban of highly hazardous pesticides to prevent suicides due to pesticide self-poisoning, compared with a null comparator. We used WHO cost-effectiveness and strategic planning (WHO-CHOICE) methods to estimate pesticide-attributable suicide rates for 100 years from 2017. Country-specific costs were obtained from the WHO-CHOICE database and denominated in 2017 international dollars (I$), discounted at a 3% annual rate, and health effects were measured in healthy life-years gained (HLYGs). We used a demographic projection model beginning with the country population in the baseline year (2017), split by 1-year age group and sex. Country-specific data on overall suicide rates were obtained for 2017 by age and sex from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017 Data Resources. The analysis involved 14 countries spanning low-income to high-income settings, and cost-effectiveness ratios were analysed at the country-specific level and aggregated according to country income group and the proportion of suicides due to pesticides. FINDINGS: Banning highly hazardous pesticides across the 14 countries studied could result in about 28 000 (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 24 000-32 000) fewer suicide deaths each year at an annual cost of I$0·007 per capita (95% UI 0·006-0·008). In the population-standardised results for the base case analysis, national bans produced cost-effectiveness ratios of $94 per HLYG (95% UI 73-123) across low-income and lower-middle-income countries and $237 per HLYG (95% UI 191-303) across upper-middle-income and high-income countries. Bans were more cost-effective in countries where a high proportion of suicides are attributable to pesticide self-poisoning, reaching a cost-effectiveness ratio of $75 per HLYG (95% UI 58-99) in two countries with proportions of more than 30%. INTERPRETATION: National bans of highly hazardous pesticides are a potentially cost-effective and affordable intervention for reducing suicide deaths in countries with a high burden of suicides attributable to pesticides. However, our study findings are limited by imperfect data and assumptions that could be improved upon by future studies. FUNDING: WHO.