Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35330330›Full record

ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2022

Cost-Effectiveness of Screening Algorithms for Familial Hypercholesterolaemia in Primary Care.

Matthew Jones, Ralph K Akyea, Katherine Payne, Steve E Humphries, Hasidah Abdul-Hamid, Stephen Weng, Nadeem Qureshi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Matthew JonesNIHR School for Primary Care Research, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4824-9724
Ralph K AkyeaNIHR School for Primary Care Research, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4529-8237
Katherine PayneManchester Centre for Health Economics, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3938-4350
Steve E HumphriesInstitute of Cardiovascular Science, University College London, London WC1E 6HX, UK.
Hasidah Abdul-HamidNIHR School for Primary Care Research, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK.
Stephen WengNIHR School for Primary Care Research, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK.
Nadeem QureshiNIHR School for Primary Care Research, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4909-0644
University of Nottingham · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBUniversity College London · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/T017384/1National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research FR12-332
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) screening within primary care is considered cost-effective, which screening approach is cost-effective has not been established. This study determines the cost-effectiveness of six case-finding strategies for screening of electronic health records to identify index patients who have genetically confirmed monogenic FH in English primary care. A decision tree was constructed to represent pathways of care for each approach (FH Case Identification Tool (FAMCAT) versions 1 and 2, cholesterol screening, Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN), Simon Broome criteria, no active screening). Clinical effectiveness was measured as the number of monogenic FH cases identified. Healthcare costs for each algorithm were evaluated from an NHS England perspective over a 12 week time horizon. The primary outcome was the incremental cost per additional monogenic FH case identified (ICER). FAMCAT2 was found to dominate (cheaper and more effective) cholesterol and FAMCAT1 algorithms, and extendedly dominate DLCN. The ICER for FAMCAT2 vs. no active screening was 8111 GBP (95% CI: 4088 to 14,865), and for Simon Broome vs. FAMCAT2 was 74,059 GBP (95% CI: -1,113,172 to 1,697,142). Simon Broome found the largest number of FH cases yet required 102 genetic tests to identify one FH patient. FAMCAT2 identified fewer, but only required 23 genetic tests.

Indexed as

cost-effectivenesseconomic evaluationelectronic health recordsfamilial hypercholesterolemiagenetics

Identifiers

PMID35330330
PMCPMC8953997
OpenAlexW4213455031

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.