Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33097026›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2020

Cost-utility and cost-benefit analyses of school-based obesity prevention program.

Haiquan Xu, Yanping Li, Songming Du, Qian Zhang, Ailing Liu, Junmao Sun, Guansheng Ma

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Interventions to prevent obesity in children aged 5 to 11 years old.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Haiquan XuInstitute of Food and Nutrition Development, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0523-4039
Yanping LiDepartment of Nutrition, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Songming DuChinese Nutrition Society, Beijing, China.
Qian ZhangNational Institute for Nutrition and Health, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, China.
Ailing LiuNational Institute for Nutrition and Health, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, China.
Junmao SunInstitute of Food and Nutrition Development, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Beijing, China.
Guansheng MaDepartment of Nutrition and Food Hygiene, School of Public Health, Peking University, 38 Xue Yuan Road, Beijing, 100191, China. mags@bjmu.edu.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8022-4597
Chinese Center For Disease Control and Prevention · CNMinistry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs · CNChinese Nutrition Society · CNHarvard University · USPeking University · CN

Funding

China Ministry of Science & Technology 2008BAI58B05National Natural Science Foundation of China 71804079Science and Technology Innovation Project of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences CAAS-ASTIP-2019-IFND
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEconomic evaluation of school-based obesity interventions could provide support for public health decision of obesity prevention. This study is to perform cost-utility and cost-benefit assessment of three school-based childhood obesity interventions including nutrition education intervention (NE), physical activity intervention (PA) and comprehensive intervention (both NE and PA, CNP) with secondary data analysis of one randomized controlled trial.

methodsThe standard cost-effectiveness analysis methods were employed from a societal perspective to the health outcome and costs that are attributable to the intervention. NE, PA and CNP were carried out separately for 2 semesters for childhood obesity interventions in primary schools. The additional quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) resulting from the interventions were measured as the health outcome. A cost-utility ratio (CUR) and A cost-benefit ratio (CBR) was calculated as the ratio of implementation costs to the total medical and productivity loss costs averted by the interventions.

resultsThe CUR and CBR were ¥11,505.9 ($1646.0) per QALY and ¥1.2 benefit per ¥1 cost respectively, and the net saving was ¥73,659.6 ($10,537.9). The CUR and CBR for nutrition education and physical activity interventions were ¥21,316.4 ($3049.6) per QALY and ¥0.7 benefit per ¥1 cost, ¥28,417.1 ($4065.4) per QALY and ¥0.4 benefit per ¥1 cost, respectively (in 2019 RMB). Compared with PA intervention, the ICERs were ¥10,335.2 ($1478.6) and 4626.3 ($661.8) for CNP and NE respectively. The CBR was ¥1.2, 0.7, and 0.4 benefits per ¥1 cost for CNP, NE, and PA interventions, respectively. Net estimated savings were achieved only through CNP intervention, amounting to ¥73,659.6 ($10,537.9).

conclusionsComprehensive school-based obesity intervention is a beneficial investment that is both cost-effective and cost saving. Compared with PA intervention, both CNP and NE intervention were more cost-effective.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisQuality-Adjusted Life YearsChildChinaFemaleHumansMalePediatric ObesitySchool Health ServicesSchoolsChildhood obesityCost-benefitCost-utilityObesity interventionSchool-based intervention

Identifiers

PMID33097026
PMCPMC7585177
OpenAlexW3093520437

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.