Abstract
Background and aim Globally, 12.8 million children have vision impairment due to uncorrected refractive error (URE). In Mongolia, one in five children needs but do not have access to spectacles. This cost-benefit analysis aims to estimate the net benefits of a children’s spectacles reimbursement scheme in Mongolia.
Methods A willingness-to-pay (WTP) survey using the contingent valuation method was administered to rural and urban Mongolia respondents. The survey assessed WTP in additional annual taxes for any child with refractive error to be provided government-subsidised spectacles. Net benefits were then calculated based on mean WTP (i.e. benefit) and cost of spectacles.
Results The survey recruited 50 respondents (mean age 40.2 ± 9.86 years; 78.0% women; 100% response rate) from rural and urban Mongolia. Mean WTP was US$24.00 ± 5.15 (95% CI US$22.55 to 25.35). The average cost of a pair of spectacles in Mongolia is US$15.00. Subtracting the average cost of spectacles from mean WTP yielded a mean positive net benefit of US$9.00.
Conclusion A spectacle reimbursement scheme is a potentially cost-effective intervention to address childhood vision impairment due to URE in Mongolia. These preliminary findings support the inclusion of children’s spectacles into existing Social Health Insurance. A much larger random sample could be employed in future research to increase the precision and generalisability of findings.
Competing Interest Statement
Professor Congdon declares that he is the Director of Research for Orbis International, Dr Chuluunkhuu declares that she is the Country Director for Orbis Mongolia, and Tai Stephan declares that she is the Global Programme Manager for Orbis International.
Clinical Trial
This is not a clinical trial study.
Funding Statement
Costs of data collection were supported by Queen's University Belfast (QUB). QUB does not have a role in data monitoring, study design, manuscript preparation and statistical analysis.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved by the Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences Research Ethics Committee, Queen's University Belfast (reference number MLHS 20_73).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos