ArticleBMJ open2015
Quantifying the utility of taking pills for preventing adverse health outcomes: a cross-sectional survey.
Article in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Team-Based Care for Hypertension: A Meta-Analysis and Simulation Study.Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) · 2023Pooled it
- Article
- Immediate Versus 5-Year Risk-Guided Initiation of Treatment for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease for Australians Aged 40 Years: A Health Economic Analysis.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of a Polypill for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in an Underserved Population.JAMA cardiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Cost Effectiveness of Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring Compared with Home or Clinic Blood Pressure Monitoring for Diagnosing Hypertension in Australia.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2023Article
- Beyond 10-Year Risk: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Statins for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease.Circulation · 2022Article
- Priorities among effective clinical preventive services in British Columbia, Canada.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Cost-effectiveness of Icosapent Ethyl for High-risk Patients With Hypertriglyceridemia Despite Statin Treatment.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Cost-effectiveness of Dapagliflozin for Treatment of Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.JAMA cardiology · 2021Article
- Article
- Do Pills Have No Ills? Capturing the Impact of Direct Treatment Disutility.PharmacoEconomics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe utility value attributed to taking pills for prevention can have a major effect on the cost-effectiveness of interventions, but few published studies have systematically quantified this value. We sought to quantify the utility value of taking pills used for prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD).
designCross-sectional survey.
settingCentral North Carolina.
participants708 healthcare employees aged 18 years and older. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Utility values for taking 1 pill/day, assessed using time trade-off, modified standard gamble and willingness-to-pay methods.
resultsMean age of respondents was 43 years (19-74). The majority of the respondents were female (83%) and Caucasian (80%). Most (80%) took at least 2 pills/day. Mean utility values for taking 1 pill/day using the time trade-off method were: 0.9972 (95% CI 0.9962 to 0.9980). Values derived from the standard gamble and willingness-to-pay methods were 0.9967 (0.9954 to 0.9979) and 0.9989 (95% CI 0.9986 to 0.9991), respectively. Utility values varied little across characteristics such as age, sex, race, education level or number of pills taken per day.
conclusionsThe utility value of taking pills daily in order to prevent an adverse CVD health outcome is approximately 0.997.
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.