ReviewEFORT open reviews2021
Understanding cost-utility analysis studies in the trauma and orthopaedic surgery literature.
Review in EFORT open reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Unlocking Value: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Hip PJI Diagnostic Pathways Employing the European Bone and Joint Infection Society/Musculoskeletal Infection Society Definition.Arthroplasty today · 2026Article
- Cost-Utility Analyses of Hemodialysis, Peritoneal Dialysis, and Kidney Transplantation in Patients with End-Stage Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2025Review
- Fractured systems: a literature review of OR/MS methods applied to orthopaedic care settings and treatments.Health systems (Basingstoke, England) · 2024Review
- Comparison between Decompression Alone and with Additional Fusion for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Spine surgery and related research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cost-utility analysis (CUA) studies are becoming increasingly important due to the need to reduce healthcare spending, especially in the field of trauma and orthopaedics.There is an increasing need for trauma and orthopaedic surgeons to understand these economic evaluations to ensure informed cost-effective decisions can be made to benefit the patient and funding body.This review discusses the fundamental principles required to understand CUA studies in the literature, including a discussion of the different methods employed to assess the health outcomes associated with different management options and the various approaches used to calculate the costs involved.Different types of model design may be used to conduct a CUA which can be broadly categorized into real-life clinical studies and computer-simulated modelling. We discuss the main types of study designs used within each category. We also cover the different types of sensitivity analysis used to quantify uncertainty in these studies and the commonly employed instruments used to assess the quality of CUAs. Finally, we discuss some of the important limitations of CUAs that need to be considered.This review outlines the main concepts required to understand the CUA literature and provides a basic framework for their future conduct. Cite this article:
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.