Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24769920›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Cost-effectiveness of breast cancer control strategies in Central America: the cases of Costa Rica and Mexico.

Laurens M Niëns, Sten G Zelle, Cristina Gutiérrez-Delgado, Gustavo Rivera Peña, Blanca Rosa Hidalgo Balarezo, Erick Rodriguez Steller, Frans F H Rutten

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Framework for developing cost-effectiveness analysis threshold: the case of Egypt.The Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

7 authors.

Laurens M NiënsInstitute for Medical Technology Assessment and Institute for Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Sten G ZelleDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Cristina Gutiérrez-DelgadoInstituto Mexicano del Seguro Social (IMSS), México DF, México.
Gustavo Rivera PeñaUnidad de Análisis Económico, Secretaria de Salud, México D.F., México.
Blanca Rosa Hidalgo BalarezoPharmaco-economics department Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, San José, Costa Rica.
Erick Rodriguez StellerMinisterio de Salud, San José, Costa Rica.
Frans F H RuttenInstitute for Medical Technology Assessment and Institute for Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper reports the most cost-effective policy options to support and improve breast cancer control in Costa Rica and Mexico. Total costs and effects of breast cancer interventions were estimated using the health care perspective and WHO-CHOICE methodology. Effects were measured in disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted. Costs were assessed in 2009 United States Dollars (US$). To the extent available, analyses were based on locally obtained data. In Costa Rica, the current strategy of treating breast cancer in stages I to IV at a 80% coverage level seems to be the most cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$4,739 per DALY averted. At a coverage level of 95%, biennial clinical breast examination (CBE) screening could improve Costa Rica's population health twofold, and can still be considered very cost-effective (ICER US$5,964/DALY). For Mexico, our results indicate that at 95% coverage a mass-media awareness raising program (MAR) could be the most cost-effective (ICER US$5,021/DALY). If more resources are available in Mexico, biennial mammography screening for women 50-70 yrs (ICER US$12,718/DALY), adding trastuzumab (ICER US$13,994/DALY) or screening women 40-70 yrs biennially plus trastuzumab (ICER US$17,115/DALY) are less cost-effective options. We recommend both Costa Rica and Mexico to engage in MAR, CBE or mammography screening programs, depending on their budget. The results of this study should be interpreted with caution however, as the evidence on the intervention effectiveness is uncertain. Also, these programs require several organizational, budgetary and human resources, and the accessibility of breast cancer diagnostic, referral, treatment and palliative care facilities should be improved simultaneously. A gradual implementation of early detection programs should give the respective Ministries of Health the time to negotiate the required budget, train the required human resources and understand possible socioeconomic barriers.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic AgentsBreast NeoplasmsCosta RicaCost-Benefit AnalysisEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansInformation DisseminationMammographyMexicoMiddle AgedQuality-Adjusted Life YearsAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic AgentsTrastuzumab

Identifiers

PMID24769920
PMCPMC4000228

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.