Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32951510›Full record

ArticleMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2020

The Impact of Including Costs and Outcomes of Dementia in a Health Economic Model to Evaluate Lifestyle Interventions to Prevent Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease.

Penny Breeze, Chloe Thomas, Praveen Thokala, Louise Lafortune, Carol Brayne, Alan Brennan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

6 authors.

Penny BreezeSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4189-8676
Chloe ThomasSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK.
Praveen ThokalaSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK.
Louise LafortuneCambridge Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, UK.
Carol BrayneCambridge Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, UK.
Alan BrennanSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK.

Funding

Department of Health PD-SPH-2015
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesEconomic evaluations of lifestyle interventions, which aim to prevent diabetes/cardiovascular disease (CVD), have not included dementia. Lifestyle interventions decrease dementia risk and extend life expectancy, leading to competing effects on health care costs. We aim to demonstrate the feasibility of including dementia in a public health cost-effectiveness analysis and quantify the overall impacts accounting for these competing effects.

methodsThe School for Public Health Research (SPHR) diabetes prevention model describes individuals' risk of type 2 diabetes, microvascular outcomes, CVD, congestive heart failure, cancer, osteoarthritis, depression, and mortality in England. In version 3.1, we adapted the model to include dementia using published data from primary care databases, health surveys, and trials of dementia to describe dementia incidence, diagnosis, and disease progression. We estimate the impact of dementia on lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained of the National Health Service diabetes prevention program (NHS DPP) from an NHS/personal social services perspective with 3 scenarios: 1) no dementia, 2) dementia only, and 3) reduced dementia risk. Subgroup, parameter, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

resultsThe lifetime cost savings of the NHS DPP per patient were £145 in the no-dementia scenario, £121 in the dementia-only scenario, and £167 in the reduced dementia risk scenario. The QALY gains increased by 0.0006 in dementia only and 0.0134 in reduced dementia risk. Dementia did not alter the recommendation that the NHS/DPP is cost-effective.

conclusionsIncluding dementia into a model of lifestyle interventions was feasible but did not change policy recommendations or modify health economic outcomes. The impact on health economic outcomes was largest where a direct impact on dementia incidence was assumed, particularly in elderly populations.

Indexed as

Risk Reduction BehaviorAgedCardiovascular DiseasesCost-Benefit AnalysisDementiaDiabetes MellitusEnglandHumansMaleModels, EconomicQuality-Adjusted Life Yearscost-effectiveness analysisdementianon-communicable diseasepublic healthsimulation

Identifiers

PMID32951510
PMCPMC7583453

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.