Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32131849›Full record

Trial reportThe international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity2020

Five-year cost-effectiveness analysis of the European Fans in Training (EuroFIT) physical activity intervention for men versus no intervention.

Spyros Kolovos, Aureliano P Finch, Hidde P van der Ploeg, Femke van Nassau, Hana M Broulikova, Agni Baka, Shaun Treweek, Cindy M Gray, Judith G M Jelsma, Christopher Bunn and 9 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialPragmatic Clinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

19 authors.

Spyros KolovosDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Aureliano P FinchDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Hidde P van der PloegAmsterdam UMC, VU medical center, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Van der Boechorststraat 7, NL-1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Femke van NassauAmsterdam UMC, VU medical center, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Van der Boechorststraat 7, NL-1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Hana M BroulikovaDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Agni BakaDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Shaun TreweekHealth Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Cindy M GrayInstitute of Health and Wellbeing, College of Social Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Judith G M JelsmaAmsterdam UMC, VU medical center, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Van der Boechorststraat 7, NL-1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Christopher BunnInstitute of Health and Wellbeing, College of Social Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Glyn C RobertsDepartment of coaching and psychology, Norwegian School of Sport Science, Oslo, Norway.
Marlene N SilvaCIPER, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
Jason M R GillInstitute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Øystein RøynesdalDepartment of coaching and psychology, Norwegian School of Sport Science, Oslo, Norway.
Willem van MechelenAmsterdam UMC, VU medical center, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Van der Boechorststraat 7, NL-1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Eivind AndersenDepartment of coaching and psychology, Norwegian School of Sport Science, Oslo, Norway.
Kate HuntInstitute for Social Marketing and Health, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.
Sally WykeInstitute of Health and Wellbeing, College of Social Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Judith E BosmansDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. j.e.bosmans@vu.nl.

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HSRU1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIncreasing physical activity reduces the risk of chronic illness including Type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and certain types of cancer. Lifestyle interventions can increase physical activity but few successfully engage men. This study aims to investigate the 5 year cost-effectiveness of EuroFIT, a program to improve physical activity tailored specifically for male football (soccer) fans compared to a no intervention comparison group.

methodsWe developed a Markov cohort model in which the impact of improving physical activity on five chronic health conditions (colorectal cancer, Type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease, stroke and depression) and mortality was modelled. We estimated costs from a societal perspective and expressed benefits as quality adjusted life years (QALYs). We obtained data from a 4-country (England, Netherlands, Portugal and Norway) pragmatic randomised controlled trial evaluating EuroFIT, epidemiological and cohort studies, and meta-analyses. We performed deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to assess the impact of uncertainty in the model's parameter values on the cost-effectiveness results. We used Monte Carlo simulations to estimate uncertainty and presented this using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs). We tested the robustness of the base case analysis using five scenario analyses.

resultsAverage costs over 5 years per person receiving EuroFIT were €14,663 and per person receiving no intervention €14,598. Mean QALYs over 5 years were 4.05 per person for EuroFIT and 4.04 for no intervention. Thus, the average incremental cost per person receiving EuroFIT was €65 compared to no intervention, while the average QALY gain was 0.01. This resulted in an ICER of €5206 per QALY gained. CEACs show that the probability of EuroFIT being cost-effective compared to no intervention is 0.53, 0.56 and 0.58 at thresholds of €10,000, €22,000 and €34,000 per QALY gained, respectively. When using a time horizon of 10 years, the results suggest that EuroFIT is more effective and less expensive compared to (i.e. dominant over) no intervention with a probability of cost-effectiveness of 0.63 at a threshold of €22,000 per QALY gained.

conclusionsWe conclude the EuroFIT intervention is not cost-effective compared to no intervention over a period of 5 years from a societal perspective, but is more effective and less expensive (i.e. dominant) after 10 years. We thus suggest that EuroFIT can potentially improve public health in a cost-effective manner in the long term.

Indexed as

Physical Conditioning, HumanCost-Benefit AnalysisDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2EuropeExerciseHumansMaleQuality-Adjusted Life YearsSports

Identifiers

PMID32131849
PMCPMC7055048

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.