Skip to main content
. 2025 Apr 9;23(5):759–766. doi: 10.1007/s40258-025-00964-x

Table 4.

Share of disease burden averted by each intervention using US$500 per DALY averted CET and US$200 per DALY averted CET

k = $500 per DALY averted k = $200 per DALY averted
Interventions Population NHB (DALYs averted) % of overall Disease burden averted* % range of disease-specific burden averted¥ Population NHB (DALYs averted) % of overall disease burden averted* % range of disease-specific burden averted¥
Do-nothing comparator
 Intervention [1] 160,000 1.52% 160,000 to 400,000 (4–10%) − 200,000 − 1.90% − 200,000 to 400,000 (− 5% to 10%)
 Intervention [2] − 56,000 − 0.53% − 56,000 to 56,000 (− 2.8% to 2.8%) − 224,000 − 2.13% − 224,000 to 56,000 (− 11.2% to 2.8%)
 Intervention [3] 157,500 1.5% 157,500 to 187,500 (10.5–12.5%) 112,500 1.07% 75,000 to 187,500 (7.5–12.5%)
 Intervention [4] 30,000 0.29% 30,000 to 37,500 (1–1.25%) 18,750 0.18% 18,750 to 37,500 (0.63–1.25%)

In this case, we are assuming that the health opportunity costs (marginal productivity estimates) for disease-specific budgets are equivalent to those of the entire health system (i.e., we assume efficient budget setting)

DALYs disability-adjusted life years, NHB net health benefit

% disease burden = population NHB/total DALY burden

*a +ve change signifies decline in burden; a −ve change signifies an increase in burden

¥Disease-specific burden for Intervention 1: 4 million DALYs; Intervention 2: 2 million DALYs; Intervention 3: 1.5 million DALYs; Intervention 4: 3 million DALYs