Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33873201›Full record

ArticleAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2021

Simulation Modeling for the Economic Evaluation of Population-Based Dietary Policies: A Systematic Scoping Review.

Karl M F Emmert-Fees, Florian M Karl, Peter von Philipsborn, Eva A Rehfuess, Michael Laxy

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Valuing behavioral interventions for obesity reduction: A scoping review of economic models.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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.

Karl M F Emmert-FeesInstitute of Health Economics and Health Care Management, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2330-1079
Florian M KarlInstitute of Health Economics and Health Care Management, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany.
Peter von PhilipsbornInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry, and Epidemiology (IBE), LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Eva A RehfuessInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry, and Epidemiology (IBE), LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Michael LaxyInstitute of Health Economics and Health Care Management, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Neuherberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Simulation modeling can be useful to estimate the long-term health and economic impacts of population-based dietary policies. We conducted a systematic scoping review following the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guideline to map and critically appraise economic evaluations of population-based dietary policies using simulation models. We searched Medline, Embase, and EconLit for studies published in English after 2005. Modeling studies were mapped based on model type, dietary policy, and nutritional target, and modeled risk factor-outcome pathways were analyzed. We included 56 studies comprising 136 model applications evaluating dietary policies in 21 countries. The policies most often assessed were reformulation (34/136), taxation (27/136), and labeling (20/136); the most common targets were salt/sodium (60/136), sugar-sweetened beverages (31/136), and fruit and vegetables (15/136). Model types included Markov-type (35/56), microsimulation (11/56), and comparative risk assessment (7/56) models. Overall, the key diet-related risk factors and health outcomes were modeled, but only 1 study included overall diet quality as a risk factor. Information about validation was only reported in 19 of 56 studies and few studies (14/56) analyzed the equity impacts of policies. Commonly included cost components were health sector (52/56) and public sector implementation costs (35/56), as opposed to private sector (18/56), lost productivity (11/56), and informal care costs (3/56). Most dietary policies (103/136) were evaluated as cost-saving independent of the applied costing perspective. An analysis of the main limitations reported by authors revealed that model validity, uncertainty of dietary effect estimates, and long-term intervention assumptions necessitate a careful interpretation of results. In conclusion, simulation modeling is widely applied in the economic evaluation of population-based dietary policies but rarely takes dietary complexity and the equity dimensions of policies into account. To increase relevance for policymakers and support diet-related disease prevention, economic effects beyond the health sector should be considered, and transparent conduct and reporting of model validation should be improved.

Indexed as

DietVegetablesCost-Benefit AnalysisFruitHumansPolicydietary policyeconomic evaluationnon-communicable disease preventionpolicy evaluationpublic health nutritionsimulation modelingsystematic scoping review

Identifiers

PMID33873201
PMCPMC8483966

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.