Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37787972›Full record

Observational studyApplied health economics and health policy2023

Evaluating the Short-Term Costs and Benefits of a Nationwide Diabetes Prevention Programme in England: Retrospective Observational Study.

Emma McManus, Rachel Meacock, Beth Parkinson, Matt Sutton

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Applied health economics and health policy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The effect of a community-based health behaviour intervention on health-related quality of life in people with Type 2 diabetes in Nepal: a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Trial
  2. Banting memorial lecture 2025: Aligning clinical practice, policy and research.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

Emma McManusHealth Organisation, Policy and Economics, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. emma.mcmanus@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3442-8721
Rachel MeacockHealth Organisation, Policy and Economics, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Beth ParkinsonHealth Organisation, Policy and Economics, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Matt SuttonHealth Organisation, Policy and Economics, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Funding

Health Services and Delivery Research Programme 16/48/07
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevention programmes typically incur short-term costs and uncertain long-term benefits. We use the National Health Service (NHS) England Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS-DPP) to investigate whether behaviour change programmes may be cost-effective even within the short-term participation period.

methodsWe analysed 384,611 referrals between June 2016 and March 2019. We estimated NHS costs using implementation costs and provider payments. We used linear regressions to relate utility changes to the number of sessions attended, based on responses to the five-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) at baseline and final session for 18,959 participants. We then calculated the corresponding quality-adjusted life year (QALY) change for all 384,611 referrals by combining the estimated regression coefficients with the observed level of attendance, with individuals that did not attend any programme sessions being assumed to experience zero benefit. In secondary analysis, we added weight change, recorded for 18,105 participants to the regression and applied predicted values to all referrals with missing weight change values estimated using multiple imputation with chained equations. We then estimated the cost-per-QALY generated.

resultsAverage cost per referral was £119 (standard deviation: £118; 2020 price year, UK £ Sterling). Each session attended was associated with a 0.0042 increase in utility (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.0025-0.0059). This generated 1,773 QALYs across all referrals (95% CI: 889-2,656). Cost-per-QALY was £24,929 (95% CI: £16,635-49,720) when implementation costs were excluded. Secondary analysis showed each session attended and kilogram of weight lost were associated with 0.0034 (95% CI: 0.0016-0.0051) and 0.0025 (95% CI: 0.0020-0.0031) increases in utility, respectively. These generated 1,542 QALYs, at a cost-per-QALY of £28,661 when implementation costs were excluded.

conclusionParticipants experienced small utility gains from session attendance and weight loss during their programme participation. These benefits alone made this low-cost behaviour change programme potentially cost-effective in the short-term.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2State MedicineCost-Benefit AnalysisEnglandHumansRetrospective StudiesWeight Loss

Identifiers

PMID37787972
PMCPMC10628047

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.