ArticleInjury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention2022
Model-based economic evaluation of ice cleat distribution programmes for the prevention of outdoor falls among adults from a Swedish societal perspective.
Article in Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimizing age-based targeting in ice cleat distribution programs for preventing winter fall injuries: a cost-effectiveness modeling study.Injury epidemiology · 2025Article
- Quasi-experimental evaluation of municipal ice cleat distribution programmes for older adults in Sweden.Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention · 2023Article
- Ice cleat distribution programmes and ice cleat use among older adults: repeated cross-sectional evidence from 63 municipal interventions in Sweden.Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention · 2022Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSlipping on snow or ice poses a significant health risk among older adults in Sweden. To combat this problem, about 80 Swedish municipalities have distributed ice cleats to older citizens (65+ years old) over the last decade. This paper details a cost-benefit analysis of such programmes. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe developed a decision-analytical model to estimate the costs and benefits of ice cleat programmes in Swedish municipalities compared with a business-as-usual scenario. The modelled benefits of the programme were based on effect estimates from previous research, data from population and healthcare registers and a survey of attitudes to and actual ice cleat use. The modelled costs of the programme were based on resource use data collected from 34 municipalities with existing ice cleat programmes. We assessed heterogeneity in the potential impact and benefit-to-cost ratios across all Swedish municipalities as a function of the average number of days with snow cover per year. Uncertainty in the cost-benefit results was assessed using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.
resultsThe average benefit-to-cost ratio was 87, ranging from about 40 in low-risk municipalities to 140 in high-risk municipalities, implying that the potential benefits of ice cleat programmes greatly outweigh their costs. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses support the robustness of this conclusion to parameter uncertainty and large changes in assumptions about the magnitude of the impact on ice cleat use and injuries.
conclusionThe benefits of distributing ice cleats to older adults appear to outweigh the costs from a Swedish societal perspective.
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.