Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21359506›Full record

ReviewClinical rheumatology2011

Introduction to economic modeling for clinical rheumatologists: application to biologic agents in rheumatoid arthritis.

Carlo A Marra, Nick Bansback, Aslam H Anis, Kamran Shojania

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical rheumatology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Voluntary activation of the sympathetic nervous system and attenuation of the innate immune response in humans.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014
    Trial
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Carlo A MarraFaculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, 2146 East Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada. carlo.marra@ubc.ca
Nick Bansback
Aslam H Anis
Kamran Shojania
University of British Columbia · CACentre for Advancing Health Outcomes · CASt. Paul's Hospital · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, debilitating inflammatory, progressive musculoskeletal disease that affects 0.5-1.0% of the adult population in Western countries. The joint destruction and progressive functional disability associated with uncontrolled RA result in tremendous impacts on health-related quality of life, ability to work, and mortality. In addition, the treatment of the disease and associated complications exact a substantial economic burden to the patients, their families, and society. In the last decade, several biological agents (biologics) have been approved for use in RA, revolutionizing treatment. These biologics, which target cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor or lymphocytes such as B or T cells, reduce functional disability and substantially slow the progression of joint damage. However, because these agents typically cost ten to 100 times more than existing available older drug therapies, there has been worldwide concern regarding their impact on healthcare budgets. As such, there has been increased attention towards economic evaluation as a means to determine whether, and in which subgroup of patients, these newer, more expensive agents confer appropriate value for their additional cost. Indeed, evaluations have guided coverage decisions for both private and public health insurance agencies such as the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in the UK. The use of economic evaluations to determine value for money for these agents has attracted both debate and controversy. Some of the controversy is related to the appropriateness of the structure of, and assumptions underlying, the decision models employed to estimate the long-term costs and benefits of these agents over existing therapies. To fully appreciate the debate, one must first understand the basic principles of economic evaluation and the necessity for using decision models to evaluate cost effectiveness. To understand the basic principles of economic evaluation, we refer the reader to an introductory article aimed at clinical rheumatologists. This paper attempts to explain the rationale for the use of economic modeling approaches to assess the value of biologics for RA using specific examples from the literature.

Indexed as

Models, EconomicAntirheumatic AgentsArthritis, RheumatoidDecision MakingHumansAntirheumatic Agents

Identifiers

PMID21359506
OpenAlexW2076121074

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.