Cost-Utility Analysis of the Integrated Care Models for the Management of Hypertension Patients: A Quasi-Experiment in Southwest Rural China.

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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Cost-effectiveness of strengthening blood pressure classification in South Korea: comparing the 2017 ACC/AHA and KSH guidelines.Clinical hypertension · 2024
   Article
2. Cost-effectiveness analysis of anlotinib plus chemotherapy with or without benmelstobart versus chemotherapy alone for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer in China.Frontiers in oncology · 2024
   Article
3. Evolutionary Trends in Integrated Care in 2000-2020 in China: A Scientometric Review Using CiteSpace.International journal of integrated care
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as