Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35865020›Full record

ArticleCJC open2022

A Cost-Utility Analysis of the Syncope: Pacing or Recording in The Later Years (SPRITELY) Trial.

Mark Hofmeister, Robert S Sheldon, Eldon Spackman, Satish R Raj, Mario Talajic, Giuliano Becker, Vidal Essebag, Deborah Ritchie, Carlos A Morillo, Andrew Krahn and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CJC open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Mark HofmeisterDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Robert S SheldonLibin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta, Department of Cardiac Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Eldon SpackmanDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Satish R RajLibin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta, Department of Cardiac Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Mario TalajicDepartment of Medicine, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Giuliano BeckerHôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Vidal EssebagMcGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Deborah RitchieLibin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta, Department of Cardiac Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Carlos A MorilloLibin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta, Department of Cardiac Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Andrew KrahnDivision of Cardiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Shahana SafdarLibin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta, Department of Cardiac Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Connor MaxeyLibin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta, Department of Cardiac Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Fiona ClementDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
University of Calgary · CAHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal · CAMcGill University Health Centre · CAMontreal Heart Institute · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The Methods: SPRITELY was a pragmatic, open-label randomized controlled trial with a median follow-up of 33 months. The primary outcome of this analysis is the cost per additional quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Resource utilization and utility data were collected prospectively, and outcomes at 2 years were compared between the 2 arms. A decision analytic model simulated a 3-year time horizon. Results: The mean cost incurred by participants randomized to the PM arm was $9918, compared to $15,416 (both in Canadian dollars) for participants randomized to the ICM arm. The ICM strategy resulted in 0.167 QALYs fewer than the PM strategy. Cost and QALY outcomes are sensitive to the proportion of participants randomized to the ICM arm who subsequently required PM insertion. In 40,000 iterations of probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the PM strategy resulted in cost-savings in 99.7% of iterations, compared with the ICM strategy. Conclusions: The PM strategy was dominant-that is, less costly and estimated to result in a greater number of QALYs. For patients with unexplained syncope, bifascicular block, and age > 50 years, a PM is more likely to be cost-effective than an ICM.

Identifiers

PMID35865020
PMCPMC9294989
OpenAlexW4220965713

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.