SynthesisPharmacoEconomics2006
Prostaglandin analogues for the treatment of glaucoma and ocular hypertension: a systematic review of economic evidence.
Synthesis in PharmacoEconomics, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic methodological review of health state values in glaucoma cost-utility analyses.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of screening for open angle glaucoma in developed countries.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We conducted a systematic review of economic studies of prostaglandin analogues for the treatment of glaucoma to assess the scope of current cost-effectiveness evidence and its relevance to decision-makers. The literature search retrieved 102 studies published before July 2005; after additional hand searching of conference proceedings, 13 full-text articles and 13 abstracts met the inclusion criteria. The reviewers extracted the key characteristics of each of the economic evaluations, and all studies received a grade in five categories to summarise the quality of the study: methodology, transparency, sensitivity, relevance and overall score. The current economic literature is predominantly focused on identifying the short-term direct cost of glaucoma treatment, particularly the precise quantification of glaucoma drug costs. Using the European and US treatment guidelines as a benchmark, it is evident that the current body of literature does not satisfy the needs of decision-makers, although certain studies provide some valuable information, which is a step towards reaching this goal. The main methodological issue in the economic models is an absence of a clinically relevant long-term effectiveness measure, or where this measure is produced, there is a lack of transparency and validation of the methods used. More attention needs to be given to modelling the consequences of treatment, and those consequences should include patient compliance, control of intraocular pressure and progression of visual field deficit, since these drive both the costs and the overall outcomes. We recognise that constructing the 'ideal' clinical outcome measure represents a major challenge to researchers. As such, we have outlined a modelling framework that could be used to produce the required level of economic evidence, and ongoing clinical research (such as the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial) could provide the validated link between intraocular pressure and disease progression, which forms an essential part of such models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.