ArticleHealth care management science2008
Requisite models for strategic commissioning: the example of type 1 diabetes.
Article in Health care management science, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Economic Modelling of Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Literature Review to Inform Conceptual Model Design.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Models in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus.PharmacoEconomics · 2016Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of Initiating an Insulin Pump in T1D Adults Using Continuous Glucose Monitoring Compared with Multiple Daily Insulin Injections: The DIAMOND Randomized Trial.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2018Trial
- Cost Effectiveness of Dapagliflozin Added to Standard of Care for the Management of Diabetic Nephropathy in the USA.Clinical drug investigation · 2022Article
- Describing practices of priority setting and resource allocation in publicly funded health care systems of high-income countries.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Practices of decision making in priority setting and resource allocation: a scoping review and narrative synthesis of existing frameworks.Health economics review · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A developing emphasis of health care reforms has been creating organisations with responsibilities for strategic commissioning of services for defined populations. Such organisations must set priorities in aiming to meet their populations' needs subject to a budget constraint. This requires estimates of the health benefits and costs of different interventions for their populations. This paper outlines a framework that does this and shows how this requires modelling to produce estimates in a way that is transparent to commissioners, of requisite complexity to produce sound estimates for priority setting using routinely available data. The example illustrated in this paper is an intervention that would improve glucose control in the English population with type 1 diabetes. It takes many years for a change in glucose management to deliver maximum benefits; hence the intervention is not good value-for-money in the short run. We aim to give a more strategic view of the costs and benefits modelling costs and benefits in a steady-state model which suggests that the intervention is good value-for-money in the long run.
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.