Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23537334›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2013

Cost effective interventions for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in low and middle income countries: a systematic review.

Amir Shroufi, Rajiv Chowdhury, Raghupathy Anchala, Sarah Stevens, Patricia Blanco, Tha Han, Louis Niessen, Oscar H Franco

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 7 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Efficacy and safety of CPAP in low- and middle-income countries.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2016
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Amir ShroufiDepartment of Public Health & Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Wort's Causeway, Cambridge, UK. amir.shroufi@doctors.org.uk
Rajiv Chowdhury
Raghupathy Anchala
Sarah Stevens
Patricia Blanco
Tha Han
Louis Niessen
Oscar H Franco

Funding

British Heart Foundation RG/08/014/24067Medical Research Council MR/L003120/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile there is good evidence to show that behavioural and lifestyle interventions can reduce cardiovascular disease risk factors in affluent settings, less evidence exists in lower income settings.This study systematically assesses the evidence on cost-effectiveness for preventive cardiovascular interventions in low and middle-income settings.

methods

designSystematic review of economic evaluations on interventions for prevention of cardiovascular disease. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Knowledge, Scopus and Embase, Opensigle, the Cochrane database, Business Source Complete, the NHS Economic Evaluations Database, reference lists and email contact with experts. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: we included economic evaluations conducted in adults, reporting the effect of interventions to prevent cardiovascular disease in low and middle income countries as defined by the World Bank. The primary outcome was a change in cardiovascular disease occurrence including coronary heart disease, heart failure and stroke. DATA EXTRACTION: After selection of the studies, data were extracted by two independent investigators using a previously constructed tool and quality was evaluated using Drummond's quality assessment score.

resultsFrom 9731 search results we found 16 studies, which presented economic outcomes for interventions to prevent cardiovascular disease in low and middle income settings, with most of these reporting positive cost effectiveness results.When the same interventions were evaluated across settings, within and between papers, the likelihood of an intervention being judged cost effective was generally lower in regions with lowest gross national income. While population based interventions were in most cases more cost effective, cost effectiveness estimates for individual pharmacological interventions were overall based upon a stronger evidence base.

conclusionsWhile more studies of cardiovascular preventive interventions are needed in low and mid income settings, the available high-level of evidence supports a wide range of interventions for the prevention of cardiovascular disease as being cost effective across all world regions.

Indexed as

Developing CountriesCardiovascular DiseasesCost-Benefit AnalysisHealth PromotionHumansProgram Evaluation

Identifiers

PMID23537334
PMCPMC3623661

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.