ArticleCMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne2011
Industry involvement and baseline assumptions of cost-effectiveness analyses: diagnostic accuracy of the Papanicolaou test.
Article in CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 4 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Industry sponsorship and research outcome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Cost Effectiveness of Pneumococcal Vaccination in Children in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2016Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Differences in the Selection of Health State Utility Values by Sponsorship in Published Cost-Effectiveness Analyses.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2021Article
- Global coverage and consistency of guideline recommendations for cancer cachexia on the Web in 2011 and 2018.Contemporary oncology (Poznan, Poland) · 2019Article
- Strategies to reach marginalized women for cervical cancer screening: A qualitative study of stakeholder perspectives.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2018Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis for clinicians.BMC medicine · 2012Article
- Individualized cost-effectiveness analysis.PLoS medicine · 2011Article
- A glimpse into the black box of cost-effectiveness analyses.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIndustry involvement has been associated with more favourable cost-effectiveness ratios in cost-effectiveness analyses, but the mechanisms for this association are unclear. We evaluated whether the assumed accuracy of the Papanicolaou (Pap) test was correlated with the features of cost-effectiveness analysis studies.
methodsWe searched PubMed (last updated April 2010) for cost-effectiveness analysis studies in which at least one strategy involved the Pap test for cervical cancer. We assessed the baseline assumed diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of the Pap test in each study and the association of these values with three levels of manufacturer involvement in the study.
resultsAmong 88 analyzed cost-effectiveness analysis studies, the assumed sensitivity of the Pap test was lower in studies with manufacturer-affiliated authors, manufacturer funding or manufacturer-related competing interests versus studies without (mean sensitivity 60% v. 70%, p < 0.001). The assumed specificity of the Pap test was lower in cost-effectiveness analyses involving new screening tests (mean 93% v. 96%, p = 0.016). The assumed specificity did not differ between trials with manufacturer involvement versus those without (mean 95% v. 95%, p = 0.755).
interpretationThe results of cost-effectiveness analyses may be affected by a downgrading of the assumed diagnostic accuracy of the standard Pap test against which newer tests or interventions are compared. New technology then seems to have more favourable results against a straw-man comparator.
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.