Fig 1.
Population density validation.
Actual[52] vs. modeled population density in Uganda. In the model, each red and blue dot represents one person.
Table 1.
Incremental outcomes, compared against the status quo.
Table 2.
Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.
Fig 2.
Efficiency frontiers for all policies and platforms.
Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are given in Table 2. A) Deaths averted per 100,000 people. B) Catastrophic expenditure averted per 100,000 people. C) Impoverishment averted per 100,000 people. UPF = universal public finance. TS = task shifting. V = vouchers. MS = mobile surgical unit. CH = cancer hospital. 2W = two-week surgical mission. The interpretation of efficiency frontiers is explained in detail in S1 Appendix.
Fig 3.
Health and financial risk protection per $100,000 spent.
Policies closest to the upper right are most efficient. A) Deaths averted vs. catastrophic expenditure averted. B) Deaths averted vs. impoverishment averted. For both financial risk protection outcomes, the mobile surgical unit is dominant. Note that negative cases of catastrophic risk protection and impoverishment averted imply cases created by the respective policies. UPF = universal public finance. TS = task shifting. V = vouchers. MS = mobile surgical unit. CH = cancer hospital. 2W = two-week surgical mission. The interpretation of these standardized outcomes panels is explained in detail in S1 Appendix.
Table 3.
Equity.
Fig 4.
Efficiency frontiers when the cost of the mobile surgical unit is increased.
A) Deaths averted per 100,000 people. B) Catastrophic expenditure averted per 100,000 people. C) Impoverishment averted per 100,000 people. The platform falls off the efficiency frontier for the financial risk protective outcomes.