ArticleBMJ public health2025
Evaluating the long-term cost-effectiveness of the COBRA-BPS programme in Pakistan.
Article in BMJ public health, 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
Introduction: The Control of Blood Pressure and Risk Attenuation-Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka (COBRA-BPS) programme is a community-based initiative for managing hypertension in rural South Asia. Previous analyses found the intervention more effective but too costly to be considered cost-effective, using a gross domestic product-based threshold cost-effectiveness threshold that overlooked Pakistan's constrained healthcare resources. Additionally, key benefits, such as avoided cardiovascular events and associated cost savings, were not considered. This study evaluates the long-term cost-effectiveness of the COBRA-BPS programme compared with the standard of care (SoC) in Pakistan. Methods: A Markov model was used to estimate long-term costs and health outcomes, measured in life years and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). Cost-effectiveness was assessed using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and net monetary benefit statistics. Thresholds of US$183 (based on Pakistan's marginal productivity of public health expenditure), US$500 and US$1000 per DALY averted were applied. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess robustness. Results: Based on the pooled results, the COBRA-BPS programme incurred higher costs than SoC, with an incremental cost of US$105 and an incremental gain of 0.41 DALYs averted over individuals' lifetimes, resulting in an ICER of US$252 per DALY averted. Conclusion: COBRA-BPS effectively reduces cardiovascular events but has marginal cost-effectiveness when evaluated against the US$183 per DALY threshold. However, it becomes cost-effective at higher thresholds. Compared with previous analyses, our study found a significantly lower cost per DALY averted, driven by substantial downstream cost savings from avoided cardiovascular events.
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.