ReviewPharmacoEconomics2006
Economic models of antiretroviral therapy: searching for the optimal strategy.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Epidemiology and Prevention of Early Infections by Multi-Drug-Resistant Organisms in Adults Undergoing Liver Transplant: A Narrative Review.Microorganisms · 2023Review
- Economic impact of HIV/AIDS: a systematic review in five European countries.Health economics review · 2014Article
- Determinants of health care costs of HIV-positive patients in the Canary Islands, Spain.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2010Article
- The economic costs and health-related quality of life of people with HIV/AIDS in the Canary Islands, Spain.BMC health services research · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The diffusion of protease inhibitors and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in the US in 1996 and 1997 reduced the number of deaths attributable to HIV disease and changed the way we think about the illness. Today, HIV disease may be deemed a fairly expensive chronic condition rather than an intolerably expensive fatal illness. Although most studies have found that patients receiving new drug therapies are hospitalised less frequently than patients who received early drug therapies, it is unclear whether the diffusion of new drug therapies has increased or decreased the annual cost of care. However, it is evident that the diffusion of new drug therapies has increased the lifetime cost of care. Analysts rely on models to simulate the course and cost of HIV disease. This study reviews the evolution of these models, paying particular attention to how these models estimate the cost of care. The primary findings of this review are that the economic data used in these models are often too imprecise to accurately identify the cost of each disease stage and are almost always outdated. Moreover, it was found that estimates of drug costs in these models may not accurately reflect actual expenditures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
16802839What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.