SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2014
Potential transferability of economic evaluations of programs encouraging physical activity in children and adolescents across different countries--a systematic review of the literature.
Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Model-based economic evaluations in smoking cessation and their transferability to new contexts: a systematic review.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2017Pooled it
- Trial
- Cost effectiveness of a multi-component school-based physical activity intervention targeting adolescents: the 'Physical Activity 4 Everyone' cluster randomized trial.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2016Trial
- Expert opinions on good practice in evaluation of health promotion and primary prevention measures related to children and adolescents in Germany.BMC public health · 2017Article
- Quality assessment of economic evaluations of health promotion programs for children and adolescents-a systematic review using the example of physical activity.Health economics review · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Physical inactivity is an increasing problem. Owing to limited financial resources, one method of getting information on the cost-effectiveness of different types of prevention programs is to examine existing programs and their results. The aim of this paper is to give an overview of the transferability of cost-effectiveness results of physical activity programs for children and adolescents to other contexts. Based on a systematic review of the literature, the transferability of the studies found was assessed using a sub-checklist of the European Network of Health Economic Evaluation Databases (EURONHEED). Thirteen studies of different physical activity interventions were found and analyzed. The results for transferability ranged from "low" to "very high". A number of different factors influence a program's cost-effectiveness (i.e., discount rate, time horizon, etc.). Therefore, transparency with regard to these factors is one fundamental element in the transferability of the results. A major point of criticism is that transferability is often limited because of lack of transparency. This paper is the first to provide both an overview and an assessment of transferability of economic evaluations of existing programs encouraging physical activity in children and adolescents. This allows decision makers to gain an impression on whether the findings are transferable to their decision contexts, which may lead to time and cost savings.
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.