Conclusion
Education intervention compared with current practice might be considered cost effective in improving cognitive development for small children in rural Uganda, that is, money spent today will serve to enhance cognitive development in the future. The results of our sensitivity analyses revealed that the gain in cognitive composite score and the cost of personnel had a large impact on the ICER. The outcome of this analysis, including the cost, health outcome, cost-effectiveness, and sensitivity analysis, can be a useful tool to inform policymakers when resource allocations are prioritized.There is still a knowledge gap to be filled in the area of education intervention and child health. The current study only considered the health outcome of the education intervention for about 18 months. Economic evaluations based on randomized trials are usually followed up for a shorter period, rarely considering a lifetime time horizon. Further research should consider a longer timeframe for the cost-effectiveness analysis, to provide relevant and more reliable empirical evidence of the education intervention.