Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22991210›Full record

ArticleJournal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research2013

An economic evaluation: Simulation of the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of universal prevention strategies against osteoporosis-related fractures.

Léon Nshimyumukiza, Audrey Durand, Mathieu Gagnon, Xavier Douville, Suzanne Morin, Carmen Lindsay, Julie Duplantie, Christian Gagné, Sonia Jean, Yves Giguère and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of osteoporosis screening and treatment strategy for postmenopausal Japanese women.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2017
    Article
  11. Screening for and treatment of osteoporosis: construction and validation of a state-transition microsimulation cost-effectiveness model.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2015
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Redefining the Economics of Geriatric Orthopedics.Geriatric orthopaedic surgery & rehabilitation · 2014
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

13 authors.

Léon NshimyumukizaDépartement de médecine sociale et préventive, Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Audrey Durand
Mathieu Gagnon
Xavier Douville
Suzanne Morin
Carmen Lindsay
Julie Duplantie
Christian Gagné
Sonia Jean
Yves Giguère
Sylvie Dodin
François Rousseau
Daniel Reinharz

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A patient-level Markov decision model was used to simulate a virtual cohort of 500,000 women 40 years old and over, in relation to osteoporosis-related hip, clinical vertebral, and wrist bone fractures events. Sixteen different screening options of three main scenario groups were compared: (1) the status quo (no specific national prevention program); (2) a universal primary prevention program; and (3) a universal screening and treatment program based on the 10-year absolute risk of fracture. The outcomes measured were total directs costs from the perspective of the public health care system, number of fractures, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Results show that an option consisting of a program promoting physical activity and treatment if a fracture occurs is the most cost-effective (CE) (cost/fracture averted) alternative and also the only cost saving one, especially for women 40 to 64 years old. In women who are 65 years and over, bone mineral density (BMD)-based screening and treatment based on the 10-year absolute fracture risk calculated using a Canadian Association of Radiologists and Osteoporosis Canada (CAROC) tool is the best next alternative. In terms of cost-utility (CU), results were similar. For women less than 65 years old, a program promoting physical activity emerged as cost-saving but BMD-based screening with pharmacological treatment also emerged as an interesting alternative. In conclusion, a program promoting physical activity is the most CE and CU option for women 40 to 64 years old. BMD screening and pharmacological treatment might be considered a reasonable alternative for women 65 years old and over because at a healthcare capacity of $50,000 Canadian dollars ($CAD) for each additional fracture averted or for one QALY gained its probabilities of cost-effectiveness compared to the program promoting physical activity are 63% and 75%, respectively, which could be considered socially acceptable. Consideration of the indirect costs could change these findings.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCanadaCost-Benefit AnalysisDecision Support TechniquesFemaleHumansMiddle AgedOsteoporosisOsteoporotic Fractures

Identifiers

PMID22991210
PMCPMC3580046

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.