Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31648271›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2019

Economic evaluation of community acquired pneumonia management strategies: A systematic review of literature.

Marufa Sultana, Abdur Razzaque Sarker, Nausad Ali, Raisul Akram, Lisa Gold

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Analysis of common respiratory pathogens in children aged 0-5 years with community-acquired pneumonia.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Marufa SultanaNutrition and Clinical Services Division, International Centre for Diarrheal Disease Research, Bangladesh (icddr,b), Dhaka, Bangladesh.ORCID 0000-0003-2475-6497
Abdur Razzaque SarkerHealth Economics and Financing Research, Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS), Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Nausad AliHealth Systems and Population Studies Division, International Centre for Diarrheal Disease Research, Bangladesh (icddr,b), Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Raisul AkramHealth Economics and Financing Research, Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS), Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Lisa GoldDeakin Health Economics, School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies · BDDeakin University · AUInternational Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research · BD

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCommunity-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a major cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. Efficient use of resources is fundamental for best use of money among the available and novel treatment options for the management of pneumonia. The objective of this study was to systematically review the economic analysis of management strategies of pneumonia.

methodsA systematic search was performed using Academic Search Complete, MEDLINE, EconLit, Global health, MEDLINE complete and Embase databases using specific subject headings or key words in May 2018 without restricting publication year. All search results were recorded and any type of economic evaluation for management of CAP was included for detailed review. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist was used for quality appraisal.

resultsNineteen studies met the inclusion criteria; ten studies were trial based, five conducted analysis using model based techniques and the rest of the studies were either based on observational, record review or pre-post intervention studies. Most of the studies conducted cost-effectiveness analysis (n = 15) and compared different combinations of antimicrobials. Most were based on developed countries (n = 17), considered adult age groups (n = 16) and used a provider perspective (n = 14). Nine studies reported dominant alternatives (lower cost with higher benefit). Sensitivity analysis was performed by the majority of studies (n = 15). Fourteen studies were assessed as either being excellent, very good or good quality, with no relationship found between publication year and study quality. Methodological variation, type of microbial used, perspective, costs and outcome measures limit the compatibility among the results of the included studies.

conclusionEconomic evaluation of interventions for management of CAP to date supports cost-effectiveness of studied interventions. However, evidence relates largely to antimicrobials choice in older populations in developed countries. Parallel economic evaluation of different management strategies of CAP is recommended for both developed and developing countries to support rigorous and robust comparative economic analysis within health care systems. PROSPERO registration no: CRD42018097174.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisQuality-Adjusted Life YearsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCommunity-Acquired InfectionsDelivery of Health CareDisease ManagementHumansPneumoniaAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID31648271
PMCPMC6812874
OpenAlexW2981932934

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.