ReviewInternal medicine (Tokyo, Japan)2018
An Evaluation of Clinical Economics and Cases of Cost-effectiveness.
Review in Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of statins, ezetimibe, and fibrates monotherapy or combination therapy for hyperlipidemia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.European journal of medical research · 2025Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of duodenal-jejunal bypass sleeve device for people with obesity.Health economics review · 2025Article
- Correlation of Anticancer Drug Prices with Outcomes of Overall Survival and Progression-Free Survival in Clinical Trials in Japan.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Health economics-based verification of functional myocardial ischemia evaluation of stable coronary artery disease in Japan: A long-term longitudinal study using propensity score matching.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2022Review
- Observational
- Socioeconomic Determinants of Universal Health Coverage in the Asian Region.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Relationships between developmental strategies for additional indications and price revisions for anticancer drugs in Japan.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Preliminary Examination of an Appropriate Price Calculation Method and Medical Treatment Costs for Foreign Visitors in Japan.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Current Trends in Medical Economics in the Circulatory Field - Socioeconomics Background and Research Issue.Circulation reports · 2019Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In order to maintain and develop a universal health insurance system, it is crucial to utilize limited medical resources effectively. In this context, considerations are underway to introduce health technology assessments (HTAs), such as cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs), into the medical treatment fee system. CEAs, which is the general term for these methods, are classified into four categories, such as cost-effectiveness analyses based on performance indicators, and in the comparison of health technologies, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is also applied. When I comprehensively consider several Japanese studies based on these concepts, I find that, in the results of the analysis of the economic performance of healthcare systems, Japan shows the most promising trend in the world. In addition, there is research indicating the superior cost-effectiveness of Rituximab against refractory nephrotic syndrome, and it is expected that health economics will be actively applied to the valuation of technical innovations such as drug discovery.
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.