Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29293611›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Reflecting the real value of health care resources in modelling and cost-effectiveness studies-The example of viral load informed differentiated care.

Paul Revill, Simon Walker, Valentina Cambiano, Andrew Phillips, Mark J Sculpher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Informing Balanced Investment in Services and Health Systems: A Case Study of Priority Setting for Tuberculosis Interventions in South Africa.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. 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

5 authors.

Paul RevillCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8632-0600
Simon WalkerCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
Valentina CambianoResearch Department of Infection & Population Health, UCL, London, United Kingdom.
Andrew PhillipsResearch Department of Infection & Population Health, UCL, London, United Kingdom.
Mark J SculpherCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe WHO HIV Treatment Guidelines suggest routine viral-load monitoring can be used to differentiate antiretroviral therapy (ART) delivery and reduce the frequency of clinic visits for patients stable on ART. This recommendation was informed by economic analysis that showed the approach is very likely to be cost-effective, even in the most resource constrained of settings. The health benefits were shown to be modest but the costs of introducing and scaling up viral load monitoring can be offset by anticipated reductions in the costs of clinic visits, due to these being less frequent for many patients. KEY ISSUES FOR ECONOMIC EVALUATION: The cost-effectiveness of introducing viral-load informed differentiated care depends upon whether cost reductions are possible if the number of clinic visits is reduced and/or how freed clinic capacity is used for alternative priorities. Where freed resources, either physical or financial, generate large health gains (e.g. if committed to patients failing ART or to other high value health care interventions), the benefits of differentiated care are expected to be high; if however these freed physical resources are already under-utilized or financial resources are used less efficiently and would not be put to as beneficial an alternative use, the policy may not be cost-effective. The implication is that the use of conventional unit costs to value resources may not well reflect the latter's value in contributing to health improvement. Analyses intended to inform resource allocated decisions in a number of settings may therefore have to be interpreted with due consideration to local context. In this paper we present methods of how economic analyses can reflect the real value of health care resources rather than simply applying their unit costs. The analyses informing the WHO Guidelines are re-estimated by implementing scenarios using this framework, informing how differentiated care can be prioritized to generate greatest gains in population health. IMPLICATIONS: The findings have important implications for how economic analyses should be undertaken and reported in HIV and other disease areas. Results provide guidance on conditions under which viral load informed differentiated care will more likely prove to be cost effective when implemented.

Indexed as

Health ResourcesModels, TheoreticalViral LoadAdultAfrica South of the SaharaAnti-HIV AgentsCost-Benefit AnalysisHIV InfectionsHumansMonitoring, PhysiologicAnti-HIV Agents

Identifiers

PMID29293611
PMCPMC5749768

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.