Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36195760›Full record

ArticleArchives of osteoporosis2022

A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of fracture liaison services in China.

Nannan Li, Lei Si, Annelies Boonen, Joop P van den Bergh, Mickaël Hiligsmann

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of osteoporosis, 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Return on investment of fracture liaison services: a systematic review and analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. La Tunisie medicale · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors.

Nannan LiDepartment of Health Services Research, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. n.li@maastrichtuniversity.nl.
Lei SiThe George Institute for Global Health, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, Australia.
Annelies BoonenDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, and CAPHRI Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Joop P van den BerghDepartment of Internal Medicine, VieCuri, Medical Centre, Venlo, The Netherlands.
Mickaël HiligsmannDepartment of Health Services Research, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study is a model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of fracture liaison services (FLS) in China, suggesting that FLS could potentially lead to lifetime cost-saving in patients who have experienced a fracture. However, Chinese-specific real-world data is needed to confirm the results of our study. PURPOSE: The study aimed to assess the potential cost-effectiveness of fracture liaison services (FLS) from the Chinese healthcare perspective with a lifetime horizon.

methodsA previously validated Markov microsimulation model was adapted to estimate the cost-effectiveness of FLS compared to no-FLS. The evaluation was conducted in patients aged 65 years with a recent fracture. Treatment pathways were differentiated by gender, FLS attendance, osteoporosis diagnosis, treatment initiation, and adherence. Given the uncertainty in FLS cost, the cost in the base-case analysis was assumed at US$200. Analyses were also performed to determine the maximum cost for making the FLS cost-saving and cost-effective at the Chinese willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. One-way sensitivity analyses were conducted.

resultsWhen compared with no-FLS, the FLS was dominant (lower costs, higher quality-adjusted life years) in our target population at the FLS cost of US$200 per patient. For every 100 patients who were admitted to the FLS, approximately four hip fractures, nine clinical vertebral fractures, and three wrist fractures would be avoided over their lifetimes. Our findings were robust to numerous one-way sensitivity analyses; however, the FLS was not cost-effective in patients aged 80 years and older.

conclusionFLS could potentially lead to lifetime cost-saving in patients who have experienced a fracture. Our study informs the potential cost-effectiveness of FLS and the knowledge gap in China; more future research incorporating Chinese-specific real-world data are needed to confirm the results of our study and to better evaluate the cost-effectiveness of FLS in China.

Indexed as

Bone Density Conservation AgentsOsteoporosisOsteoporotic FracturesChinaCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansQuality-Adjusted Life YearsSecondary PreventionBone Density Conservation AgentsCost-effectivenessFractureFracture liaison servicesOsteoporosis

Identifiers

PMID36195760
PMCPMC9532296

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.