Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31218458›Full record

ReviewCurrent urology reports2019

Cost Comparison of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Treatment Options.

Molly E DeWitt-Foy, Bradley C Gill, James C Ulchaker

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current urology reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. The state of TURP through a historical lens.World journal of urology · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 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

3 authors.

Molly E DeWitt-FoyDepartment of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Mail Stop Q10-1 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA. dewittm@ccf.org.
Bradley C GillDepartment of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Mail Stop Q10-1 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA.
James C UlchakerDepartment of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Mail Stop Q10-1 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewTo provide an economic context within which to consider treatment options for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). To this end, this review provides a comparison of the costs of combination medical therapy, operative treatment, and office-based therapies for BPH from a payer perspective. RECENT

findingsAnalysis of Medicare charges from the authors' institution, as well as local retail costs of medication, demonstrated a wide range in costs of commonly used BPH treatments. In this study, interventions for BPH reached cost equivalence with combination medical therapy within 6 months to 8 years. A myriad of options for managing men with symptomatic BPH exist. It is prudent not only to consider surgeon preference and patient-specific factors when selecting a treatment but also to understand the economic impact different BPH therapies confer.

Indexed as

Combined Modality TherapyCosts and Cost AnalysisHumansMaleMedicareProstatic HyperplasiaUnited StatesUrological AgentsUrologic Surgical Procedures, MaleUrological AgentsBenign prostatic hyperplasiaCost analysisLower urinary tract symptomsMedication therapy management

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.