Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35445871›Full record

ArticleActa diabetologica2022

The transferability and validity of a population-level simulation model for the economic evaluation of interventions in diabetes: the MICADO model.

Sajad Emamipour, Eva Pagano, Daniela Di Cuonzo, Stefan R A Konings, Amber A van der Heijden, Petra Elders, Joline W J Beulens, Jose Leal, Talitha L Feenstra

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta diabetologica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Sajad EmamipourDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. s.emamipour@umcg.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2511-4285
Eva PaganoUnit of Clinical Epidemiology, "Città della Salute e della Scienza" Hospital and CPO Piemonte, Turin, Italy.
Daniela Di CuonzoUnit of Clinical Epidemiology, "Città della Salute e della Scienza" Hospital and CPO Piemonte, Turin, Italy.
Stefan R A KoningsDepartment of Psychiatry, Interdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation (ICPE), University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Amber A van der HeijdenDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUMC, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Petra EldersDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUMC, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Joline W J BeulensDepartment of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUMC, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jose LealNuffield Department of Population Health, Health Economics Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Talitha L FeenstraFaculty of Science and Engineering, Groningen Research Institute of Pharmacy, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLAzienda Ospedaliera Citta' della Salute e della Scienza di Torino · ITUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NLUniversity of Groningen · NLUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

Horizon 2020 754425Innovative Medicines Initiative 115881
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsValid health economic models are essential to inform the adoption and reimbursement of therapies for diabetes mellitus. Often existing health economic models are applied in other countries and settings than those where they were developed. This practice requires assessing the transferability of a model developed from one setting to another. We evaluate the transferability of the MICADO model, developed for the Dutch 2007 setting, in two different settings using a range of adjustment steps. MICADO predicts micro- and macrovascular events at the population level.

methodsMICADO simulation results were compared to observed events in an Italian 2000-2015 cohort (Casale Monferrato Survey [CMS]) and in a Dutch 2008-2019 (Hoorn Diabetes Care Center [DCS]) cohort after adjusting the demographic characteristics. Additional adjustments were performed to: (1) risk factors prevalence at baseline, (2) prevalence of complications, and (3) all-cause mortality risks by age and sex. Model validity was assessed by mean average percentage error (MAPE) of cumulative incidences over 10 years of follow-up, where lower values mean better accuracy.

resultsFor mortality, MAPE was lower for CMS compared to DCS (0.38 vs. 0.70 following demographic adjustment) and adjustment step 3 improved it to 0.20 in CMS, whereas step 2 showed best results in DCS (0.65). MAPE for heart failure and stroke in DCS were 0.11 and 0.22, respectively, while for CMS was 0.42 and 0.41.

conclusionsThe transferability of the MICADO model varied by event and per cohort. Additional adjustments improved prediction of events for MICADO. To ensure a valid model in a new setting it is imperative to assess the impact of adjustments in terms of model accuracy, even when this involves the same country, but a new time period.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Cohort StudiesCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansIncidenceRisk FactorsCardiovascular diseaseDiabetes complicationsHealth economicsTransferability

Identifiers

PMID35445871
PMCPMC9156453
OpenAlexW4224287318

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.