ArticleStatistics in medicine2026
Meta-Analysis of Cost-Effectiveness.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Meta-Analysis of Incremental Net Benefit from Trial-Based Health Economic Evaluations in R: A Tutorial.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Review
- Landscape Analysis of Literature Using Quantitative Approaches to Synthesize Economic Evaluation Studies: A Scoping Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Review
- Comment on "Meta-Analysis of Cost-Effectiveness" by Bang and Zhao: Combinability, Joint Modeling, and a Two-Stage Framework for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Synthesis.Statistics in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Systematic review and meta-analysis are widely accepted approaches for evaluating treatment effectiveness. Meta-analysis generally addresses statistical aspects of systematic reviews, such as the pooling of treatment effect sizes, assessment of heterogeneity, and statistical inference. To complement treatment effectiveness, cost-effectiveness is often conducted to encompass both clinical and economic perspectives. However, there are few statistical methods proposed for meta-analyses of cost-effectiveness, and none is used widely. In fact, meta-analysis is currently not encouraged for cost-effectiveness due to methodological and statistical complexities. In this paper, we propose simple meta-analytic methods for cost-effectiveness, which may serve as a starting point for future work. We illustrate the methods using two examples from systematic reviews on wound interventions and mental illness.
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.