ArticleVascular health and risk management2022
Cost-Effectiveness of Cardioverter-Defibrillator Implantation in Kazakhstan.
Article in Vascular health and risk management, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for primary prevention in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a Markov model using JROAD-DPC cost data in Japan.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Abstract: Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. The implementation of effective technologies such as Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) for patients at risk of sudden cardiac death requires additional health system resources. Objective: To assess the economic effectiveness of ICD in comparison with conservative tactics for preventing life-threatening rhythm disturbances in Kazakhstan. Methods: A Markov model was built with a time horizon of 35 years. Mortality and utility data were obtained from the available literature. The economic parameters of the model are based on the approved tariffs for medical services in Kazakhstan and clinical protocols. Following WHO recommendations, a willingness to pay threshold of three times gross domestic product per capita was used to assess cost-effectiveness. A discount rate of 3.5% was applied to both costs and benefits. To deal with parameter uncertainties and to provide robust analysis, a probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed, randomly varying all inputs subject to uncertainty assuming a statistical distribution. Results: The total costs in the primary prevention (PP) group by ICD implantation and in the control group were 8,903,786 tenges and 3,194,414 tenges, respectively. The discounted total quality-adjusted life-years saved (QALYs) in the ICD and control groups were 6.48 and 4.98, respectively. The indicator of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio amounted to3791604 tenge, which is below the willingness to pay threshold and indicates the cost-effectiveness of using ICD as a PP strategy in patients with sudden cardiac death risk factors in the health care of Kazakhstan. Conclusion: The ICD for the primary prevention of the development of life-threatening rhythm disturbances and sudden cardiac death is a cost-effective health technology from the position of a payer in the health care system of Kazakhstan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.