Cost-effectiveness of oil and milk fortification by scale for reducing Vitamin A and Vitamin D deficiency in India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although broad-scale data might suggest low prevalence, millions of children in India still suffer from Vitamin A and Vitamin D deficiencies despite India's existing guidelines for Vitamin A deficiency. To address the issue, the Government of India has recommended fortification of oil and milk to improve Vitamin A and Vitamin D consumption. However, there is limited information on the health benefits and cost-effectiveness of fortifying oil and milk at scale. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the health benefits and cost-effectiveness of supplementation programme and fortification of milk and oil among children under 5 years, pregnant women, women in the reproductive age group, and the elderly. DATA AND METHODS: To measure the health benefits associated with supplementation and fortification of oil and milk, the number of DALYs that are currently lost due to Vitamin A and Vitamin D deficiencies were estimated. For Vitamin A related mortality, a reduction of 4%, 12% and 23% were assumed while the assumptions for estimating morbidity benefits were derived from Global Burden of Disease. For the costing exercise, we considered the following two scenarios: (1) high-dose vitamin A supplementation for children and pregnant women; (2) industrial fortification of oil for children, pregnant women, women in the reproductive age group, and the elderly. RESULTS: Overall, intervention related to Vitamin A could avert 1,119,044 Years of Life Lost (YLLs) at a 23% reduction, 194,616 YLLs at 4%, and 583,849 YLLs at 12% and 28,534 YLDs. Intervention related to Vitamin D could avert 99,219 YLDs. The total cost for supplying supplements to approximately 109,965 thousand children and 26,920 thousand pregnant women is around 26 million USD. The cost to fortify is 7.6 million USD for oil and 9.8 million USD for milk fortification for children and women. The overall cost effectiveness ratio of the fortification programme is 150. CONCLUSION: Fortification could emerge as a potentially superior long-term solution, considering the widespread consumption of oil and milk, offering a broader reach to the population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".