ArticleEuropean journal of ageing2024
Cost-effectiveness analysis of the digital fall preventive intervention Safe Step among community-dwelling older people aged 70 and older.
Article in European journal of ageing, 2024. 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.
- A Mobile Application for Fall Prevention Among Older Adults in Rural Thailand: A Research and Development Approach.Health promotion perspectives · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Falls are the most common cause of injury in older people, with consequences for the individual and society. With an increasing population of older people, falls and related costs are expected to increase. It is crucial to identify scalable and cost-effective interventions and subsequently reduce fall-related costs. The aim was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the Safe Step digital fall preventive exercise intervention over a period of 12 years and, in addition, to evaluate the impact of increased recruitment cost and decreased intervention effect. The intervention was evaluated in an observational study in a municipality context targeting community-dwelling older people of age 70 + . A Markov model with five states was used to model the cost-effectiveness of the Safe Step intervention and evaluate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and fall-related costs from a societal perspective. By using data from a meta-analysis as basis for the estimated intervention effect, the Safe Step intervention was compared with a no-intervention alternative. The results showed that the Safe Step intervention dominated no intervention. In the sensitivity analysis with the most conservative estimate of intervention effect, the ICER was €7 616 per QALY gained. Hence, Safe Step showed to be a cost-saving fall preventive intervention in older people at risk of falling and potentially cost-effective even with a low estimated intervention effect. Future studies on efficacy of fall preventive digital interventions will contribute in precising effect estimates and enhance the validity of these cost-effectiveness results.
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.