SynthesisBMC public health2006
Coronary heart disease policy models: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC public health, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 7 of them syntheses 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
35 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 91 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review of Microsimulation Models in Cardiometabolic Disease: Model Calibration and Validation.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Pooled it
- Policy models for preventative interventions in cardiometabolic diseases: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2025Pooled it
- The conceptualisation of cardiometabolic disease policy model in the UK.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- Modelling health and economic impact of nutrition interventions: a systematic review.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2023Pooled it
- The impact of clinical and population strategies on coronary heart disease mortality: an assessment of Rose's big idea.BMC public health · 2022Pooled it
- Models for estimating and projecting global, regional and national prevalence and disease burden of asthma: a systematic review.Journal of global health · 2020Pooled it
- A systematic review of economic evaluations of interventions to tackle cardiovascular disease in low- and middle-income countries.BMC public health · 2012Pooled it
- Adverse risk factor trends limit gains in coronary heart disease mortality in Barbados: 1990-2012.PloS one · 2019Trial
- Public health economic modelling in evaluations of salt and/or alcohol policies: a systematic scoping review.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Using Joint Longitudinal and Time-to-Event Models to Improve the Parameterization of Chronic Disease Microsimulation Models: an Application to Cardiovascular Disease.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- Evolution and Reproducibility of Simulation Modeling in Epidemiology and Health Policy Over Half a Century.Epidemiologic reviews · 2022Review
- Gazing through time and beyond the health sector: Insights from a system dynamics model of cardiovascular disease in Australia.PloS one · 2021Article
- Cardiovascular Diseases in Central and Eastern Europe: A Call for More Surveillance and Evidence-Based Health Promotion.Annals of global health · 2020Review
- Simulation modeling to enhance population health intervention research for chronic disease prevention.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2019Article
- Review
- Validation of a Cardiovascular Disease Policy Microsimulation Model Using Both Survival and Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2017Article
- Article
- Agent-Based Modeling of Chronic Diseases: A Narrative Review and Future Research Directions.Preventing chronic disease · 2016Review
- Using electronic health records to predict costs and outcomes in stable coronary artery disease.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2016Article
- The Michigan Model for Coronary Heart Disease in Type 2 Diabetes: Development and Validation.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe prevention and treatment of coronary heart disease (CHD) is complex. A variety of models have therefore been developed to try and explain past trends and predict future possibilities. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the strengths and limitations of existing CHD policy models.
methodsA search strategy was developed, piloted and run in MEDLINE and EMBASE electronic databases, supplemented by manually searching reference lists of relevant articles and reviews. Two reviewers independently checked the papers for inclusion and appraisal. All CHD modelling studies were included which addressed a defined population and reported on one or more key outcomes (deaths prevented, life years gained, mortality, incidence, prevalence, disability or cost of treatment).
resultsIn total, 75 articles describing 42 models were included; 12 (29%) of the 42 models were micro-simulation, 8 (19%) cell-based, and 8 (19%) life table analyses, while 14 (33%) used other modelling methods. Outcomes most commonly reported were cost-effectiveness (36%), numbers of deaths prevented (33%), life-years gained (23%) or CHD incidence (23%). Among the 42 models, 29 (69%) included one or more risk factors for primary prevention, while 8 (19%) just considered CHD treatments. Only 5 (12%) were comprehensive, considering both risk factors and treatments. The six best-developed models are summarised in this paper, all are considered in detail in the appendices.
conclusionExisting CHD policy models vary widely in their depth, breadth, quality, utility and versatility. Few models have been calibrated against observed data, replicated in different settings or adequately validated. Before being accepted as a policy aid, any CHD model should provide an explicit statement of its aims, assumptions, outputs, strengths and limitations.
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.