Trial reportPloS one2015
Cost-effectiveness of physical activity among women with menopause symptoms: findings from a randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of different physical activity interventions on depressive symptoms in menopausal women: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- Aerobic exercise for vasomotor menopausal symptoms: A cost-utility analysis based on the Active Women trial.PloS one · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Menopause is a period that may predispose one to a decrease in muscle strength, cardiorespiratory fitness, and quality of life. A study was carried out to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of physical activity among women displaying symptoms of menopause. The cost-effectiveness analysis was based on data from a six-month randomised controlled trial (n = 151). The women in the intervention group engaged in an unsupervised session of at least 50 minutes of physical activity four times a week. The control group continued their physical activity as before. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated in terms of maximal oxygen consumption, lean muscle mass, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. A bootstrap technique was utilised to estimate uncertainty around the point estimate for ICER associated with the intervention. The mean total cost in the intervention group was €1,307 (SEM: €311) and in the control group was €1,253 (SEM: €279, p = 0.10) per person. The mean intervention cost was €208 per person. After six months of the behaviour-change intervention, the ICER was €63 for a 1 ml/kg/min improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness, the additional cost per one-gram increase in lean muscle mass was €126, and the cost per QALY gained was €46. According to the findings, physical activity among menopausal women was cost-effective for cardiorespiratory fitness, for lean muscle mass, and for QALYs gained, since the intervention was more effective than the actions within the control group and the additional effects of physical activity were gained at a very low price. From the societal perspective, the intervention used may promote ability to work and thereby save on further costs associated with early retirement or disability pension if the physical-activity level remains at least the same as during the intervention.
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.