Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34420954›Full record

ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2021

A Cost-Consequence Analysis of Different Screening Procedures in Alzheimer's Disease: Results from the MOPEAD Project.

Anders Wimo, Mark Belger, Jaka Bon, Frank Jessen, Annette Dumas, Milica G Kramberger, Laura Jamilis, Gunilla Johansson, Adrián Rodrigo Salas, Octavio Rodríguez Gómez and 11 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Alzheimer's disease diagnosis and management: Perspectives from around the world.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2022
    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

21 authors at 10 institutions in 6 countries.

Anders WimoDepartment of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Neurogeriatrics, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden.
Mark BelgerEli Lilly and Company Ltd (ELI), Bracknell, UK.
Jaka BonUniversity Medical Centre Ljubljana (UMCL), Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Frank JessenUniversity of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Department of Psychiatry, Cologne, Germany.
Annette DumasASDM Consulting, EU Affairs Director, Brussels, Belgium.
Milica G KrambergerDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Ljubljana and Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Laura JamilisGMV Soluciones Globales Internet S.A.U. (GMV), Spain.
Gunilla JohanssonDepartment of Neurobiology, Care sciences and Society, Division of Neurogeriatrics, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden.
Adrián Rodrigo SalasGMV Soluciones Globales Internet S.A.U. (GMV), Spain.
Octavio Rodríguez GómezFundació ACE (FACE), Barcelona, Spain.
Lena SannemannUniversity of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Department of Psychiatry, Cologne, Germany.
Malou StoekenbroekAmsterdam UMC, VU University, Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Miren Gurruchaga TelleriaResearch Center and Memory Clinic, Fundació ACE, Institut Català de Neurociències Aplicades, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.
Sergi ValeroResearch Center and Memory Clinic, Fundació ACE, Institut Català de Neurociències Aplicades, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.
Lisa VermuntAmsterdam UMC, VU University, Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Lisa WaterinkAmsterdam UMC, VU University, Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Bengt WinbladDepartment of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Neurogeriatrics, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden.
Peter Jelle VisserAmsterdam UMC, VU University, Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Marissa ZwanAmsterdam UMC, VU University, Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Mercè BoadaFundació ACE (FACE), Barcelona, Spain.
Collaborators and members of the MOPEAD consortium
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLFundació ACE · ESGMV Innovating Solutions (Spain) · ESInstituto de Salud Carlos III · ESKarolinska Institutet · SEUniversity of Cologne · DEEli Lilly (United Kingdom) · GBKarolinska University Hospital · SELjubljana University Medical Centre · SIUniversity of Ljubljana · SI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFor care planning and support, under-detection and late diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a great challenge. Models of Patient-Engagement for Alzheimer's Disease (MOPEAD) is an EU-funded project aiming at testing different strategies to improve this situation.

objectiveTo make a cost-consequence analysis of MOPEAD.

methodsFour screening strategies were tested in five countries (Germany, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, and Sweden): 1) a web-approach; 2) Open-House initiative; 3) in primary care; and 4) by diabetes specialists. Persons-at-risk of AD in all strategies were offered referral to a hospital-based specialist. The primary health-economic outcome was the cost per true-positive case (TP) of AD from the screened population.

resultsOf 2,847 screened persons, 1,121 screened positive (39%), 402 were evaluated at memory clinics (14%), and 236 got an AD diagnosis (8%). The cost per TP of those screened was €3,115 with the web-approach, €2,722 with the Open-House, €1,530 in primary care, and €1,190 by diabetes specialists. Sensitivity analyses that more likely reflect the real-world situation confirmed the results. The number-needed-to-screen was 30 with the web-approach, 8 with the Open-House and primary care, and 6 with the diabetes specialists.There were country differences in terms of screening rates, referrals to memory clinics, staff-types involved, and costs per TP.

conclusionIn primary care and by the diabetes specialist, the costs per TP/screened population were lowest, but the capacity of such settings to identify cases with AD-risk must be discussed. Hence new diagnostic strategies such as web-solutions and Open-House initiatives may be valuable after modifications.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisInternetMass ScreeningPatient ParticipationPrimary Health CareAlzheimer DiseaseDiabetes MellitusEuropeHumansAlzheimer’s diseasecost analysiscost-consequence analysiscostsdementiadiagnosisdiagnostic work-upscreening

Identifiers

PMID34420954
PMCPMC8543247
OpenAlexW3193821230

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.