Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30098667›Full record

ReviewValue in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research2018

Productivity Benefits of Medical Care: Evidence from US-Based Randomized Clinical Trials.

Alice J Chen, Dana P Goldman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

2 authors.

Alice J ChenLeonard D. Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics and Sol Price School of Public Policy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. Electronic address: alicejc@price.usc.edu.
Dana P GoldmanLeonard D. Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics, Sol Price School of Public Policy, and School of Pharmacy University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Funding

USC-Yale Roybal Center for Behavioral Interventions in AgingP30AG024968 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI JASON N. DOCTOR, Daniella Meeker · 2004 to 2026
$14.7M
USC Resource Center for Minority Aging Research (US-RCMAR)P30AG043073 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI EMMA AGUILA, JENNIFER A AILSHIRE · 2012 to 2026
$10.1M
AN ECONOMIC AND BEHAVIORAL EVALUATION OF MEDICARE PART DP01AG033559 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI GOLDMAN, DANA P · 2011 to 2015
$3.0M
The Long-Term Benefits of Interventions to Improve T2D OutcomesR01DK107552 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI GOLDMAN, DANA P, HUCKFELDT, PETER · 2016 to 2019
$2.6M
NIA NIH HHS P01 AG033559NIA NIH HHS P30 AG024968NIA NIH HHS P30 AG043073NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK107552
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOne of the key recommendations of the Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine is to take a societal perspective when evaluating new technologies-including measuring the productivity benefits of new treatments. Yet relatively little is known about the impact that new treatments have on labor productivity.

objectivesTo examine the relationship between new drug treatments and gains in labor productivity across conditions in the United States and to evaluate which randomized clinical trials (RCTs) collected labor productivity data.

methodsWe collected data on US-based RCTs with work-ability surveys from searches of Google Scholar, PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Registry of Clinical Trials, and ClinicalTrails.gov. Combining RCT data with survey data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, we assessed productivity changes from new drug treatments.

resultsDuring the last decade, some disease conditions have seen treatments that improve ability to work by as much as 60%. The annual increase in productivity gains attributable to new drug treatments was modest 1.1% (P = 0.53). Of the 5092 RCTs reviewed, ability-to-work measures were collected in 2% of trials. Work productivity surveys were more likely among prevalent medical conditions that affected individuals who worked, earned higher wages, and experienced larger reductions in hours worked as a consequence of disease diagnosis.

conclusionsFrom our data, we estimated that drug innovation increased productivity by 4.8 million work days per year and $221 billion in wages per year. These labor-sector benefits should be taken into account when assessing the socially optimal cost for new drug innovation.

Indexed as

EfficiencyCost-Benefit AnalysisDelivery of Health CareHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicUnited Statesdrug valuelabor productivityrandomized clinical trialswork ability

Identifiers

PMID30098667
PMCPMC6092019

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.