ArticlePharmacoEconomics2025
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Methods Used in Evaluations of Treatment for Cystic Fibrosis: A Scoping Review.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCystic fibrosis (CF) is a rare genetic condition requiring extensive medical care, which has a significant impact on people with CF. Advances in treatment have extended life expectancy, yet there remains a significant economic burden to manage CF. Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is crucial for evaluating the economic value of treatments and screening for CF. This scoping review seeks to highlight the best practices and gaps in the current evidence base, contributing to robust and comparable CEAs in CF research.
methodsA scoping review was conducted using PubMed and Embase. Studies were included if they featured a CEA focused on CF treatment. Data extraction covered study characteristics, model inputs, and modeling assumptions. A qualitative synthesis was conducted to assess the inclusion of considerations for both healthcare and societal impacts.
resultsIn total, 11 studies were included. Of these, six focused on evaluations of supportive therapies for CF and five focused on evaluation of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulators. Heterogeneity in comparators and drug costing methods complicated cross-study comparisons. A qualitative review revealed differences in the types of costs and outcomes considered. Studies captured long-term disease progression, health-related quality-of-life effects, and direct medical costs.
conclusionsThis review highlights the complexity of CEAs for CF treatment and underscores the need for standardized methodologies and comprehensive evaluations, including broader economic impacts, to support more robust analyses and better-informed decision-making in CF treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40301297What 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.