Trial reportObesity (Silver Spring, Md.)2026
Cost-Effectiveness of Two Iterations of a Community-Based Cardiovascular Disease Prevention Intervention.
Trial report in Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03059472 (Strong Hearts for New York), which is not on this 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.
Strong Hearts for New York: A Rural Community CVD Prevention Program
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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to conduct cost analysis (CA) and cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of Strong Hearts, Healthy Communities (SHHC) implemented in two randomized trials.
methodsWomen with obesity or women who were sedentary with overweight who were ≥ 40 years old from rural medically underserved towns were randomized to SHHC intervention or control. CA calculated total and per participant costs and opportunity costs. CEA compared incremental costs to incremental outcome changes. Quality-adjusted life year (QALY) CEA compared incremental costs and effectiveness of a national SHHC intervention for a hypothetical cohort of 2.2 million women.
resultsSHHC-1.0 resource cost was $775/participant and SHHC-2.0 was $747. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio from the payer's perspective for SHHC-1.0 was $346/kg weight loss and $187 and $155 for SHHC-2.0 at 24 and 48 weeks, respectively. Over a 10-year horizon, to avert QALYs lost, SHHC-1.0 was estimated to cost $238,271 from the societal perspective and $62,646 from the health care sector perspective. For SHHC-2.0, the corresponding numbers were $214,257 and $67,747 at 24 weeks and $94,395 and $11,341 at 48 weeks.
conclusionsSHHC-2.0 compared favorably to SHHC-1.0 and could be cost-effective for longer-term effects. Results can help guide policy makers' decisions on larger-scale community-based obesity and cardiovascular disease prevention interventions.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03059472.
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.