SynthesisCurrent cardiology reviews2024
A Systematic Review of Economic Evidence of Cardiovascular Interventions in India.
Synthesis in Current cardiology reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiovascular diseases (CVDs) continue to be the primary cause of mortality globally and invariably in India as well. The rapid upsurge in the prevalence of CVDs in India has created a pressing need to promote contemporary, sustainable, and cost-effective interventions to tackle the CVD burden. This systematic review integrates the research-based evidence of the cost-effectiveness of various interventions that can be adapted to control CVDs in India.
methodsDatabases, namely, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Google Scholar, were searched for data on the economic evaluation of interventions targeting CVD based on the Indian population for a period of 30 years (1991-2021). Two reviewers assessed the articles for eligibility, and data were extracted from the shortlisted articles as per a predefined template, including the quantification of methodological aspects.
resultsIn total, 1249 studies were examined, out of which 23 completely met the inclusion criteria for full-text review. A total of 16 studies were based solely on the Indian population, while the rest (7) included South Asia/Asia for the intervention, of which India was a participant nation. Most of the economic evaluations targeted treatment-based or pharmacological interventions (14) for CVDs. The evaluations were based on Decision-based models (10), Randomized controlled Trials (RCTs) (9), and Observational studies (4). The cost-effectiveness ratio for the included studies exhibited a diverse range due to variations in methodological approaches, such as differences in study settings, populations, and inconsistencies in study design. The mean ICER (Incremental Cost-effectiveness ratio) for primordial and primary preventions was found to be 3073.8 (US $2022) and 17489.9 (US $2022), respectively. Moreover, the combined mean value for secondary and tertiary prevention was 2029.6 (US$2022).
conclusionThe economic evidence of public health interventions are expanding, but their focus is restricted towards pharmacological interventions. There is an urgency to emphasize primordial and primary prevention for better outcomes in health economics decision-making. Technology- based avenues for intervention need more exploration in order to cater to a large population like India.
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.