Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27488449›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2016

A decision analytic model to investigate the cost-effectiveness of poisoning prevention practices in households with young children.

Felix Achana, Alex J Sutton, Denise Kendrick, Mike Hayes, David R Jones, Stephanie J Hubbard, Nicola J Cooper

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Cost-effectiveness of the 'Stay One Step Ahead' Home Safety programme for the prevention of injuries among children under 5 years.Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Felix AchanaClinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK. f.achana@warwick.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-8727-9125
Alex J SuttonDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK.
Denise KendrickDivision of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK.
Mike HayesChild Accident Prevention Trust, London, SE16 4DG, UK.
David R JonesDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK.
Stephanie J HubbardDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK.
Nicola J CooperDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK.
University of Leicester · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GBUniversity of Warwick · GB

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-0407-10231
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSystematic reviews and a network meta-analysis show home safety education with or without the provision of safety equipment is effective in promoting poison prevention behaviours in households with children. This paper compares the cost-effectiveness of home safety interventions to promote poison prevention practices.

methodsA probabilistic decision-analytic model simulates healthcare costs and benefits for a hypothetical cohort of under 5 year olds. The model compares the cost-effectiveness of home safety education, home safety inspections, provision of free or low cost safety equipment and fitting of equipment. Analyses are conducted from a UK National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective and expressed in 2012 prices.

resultsEducation without safety inspection, provision or fitting of equipment was the most cost-effective strategy for promoting safe storage of medicines with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £2888 (95 % credible interval (CrI) £1990-£5774) per poison case avoided or £41,330 (95%CrI £20,007-£91,534) per QALY gained compared with usual care. Compared to usual care, home safety interventions were not cost-effective in promoting safe storage of other household products.

conclusionEducation offers better value for money than more intensive but expensive strategies for preventing medicinal poisonings, but is only likely to be cost-effective at £30,000 per QALY gained for families in disadvantaged areas and for those with more than one child. There was considerable uncertainty in cost-effectiveness estimates due to paucity of evidence on model parameters. Policy makers should consider both costs and effectiveness of competing interventions to ensure efficient use of resources.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisFamily CharacteristicsHealth Care CostsPoisoningPoisonsProtective DevicesSafetyChild, PreschoolFemaleHealth EducationHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleModels, TheoreticalQuality-Adjusted Life YearsPoisonsChildrenDecision modelsEconomic evaluationInjury preventionPoisoningsPublic health

Identifiers

PMID27488449
PMCPMC4973049
OpenAlexW2505844571

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.