ArticleScientific reports2019
Preventive Pharmacotherapy for Cardiovascular Disease: A Modelling Study Considering Health Gain, Costs, and Cost-Effectiveness when Stratifying by Absolute Risk.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging markers of ageing: a multi-centre, cross-sectional cohort study.European heart journal open · 2025Article
- Predicting the risk of diabetes complications using machine learning and social administrative data in a country with ethnic inequities in health: Aotearoa New Zealand.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- Prioritization of intervention domains to prevent cardiovascular disease: a country-level case study using global burden of disease and local data.Population health metrics · 2023Article
- A Unified Model of Age-Related Cardiovascular Disease.Biology · 2022Review
- Apolipoprotein B and Cardiovascular Disease: Biomarker and Potential Therapeutic Target.Metabolites · 2021Review
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death internationally. We aimed to model the impact of CVD preventive double therapy (a statin and anti-hypertensive) by clinician-assessed absolute risk level. An established and validated multi-state life-table model for the national New Zealand (NZ) population was adapted. The new version of the model specifically considered the 60-64-year-old male population which was stratified by risk using a published NZ-specific CVD risk equation. The intervention period of treatment was for five years, but a lifetime horizon was used for measuring benefits and costs (a five-year horizon was also implemented). We found that for this group offering double therapy was highly cost-effective in all absolute risk categories (eg, NZ$1580 per QALY gained in the >20% in 5 years risk stratum; 95%UI: Dominant to NZ$3990). Even in the lowest risk stratum (≤5% risk in 5 years), the cost per QALY was only NZ$25,500 (NZ$28,200 and US$19,100 in 2018). At an individual level, the gain for those who responded to the screening offer and commenced preventive treatment ranged from 0.6 to 4.9 months of quality-adjusted life gained (or less than a month gain with a five-year horizon). Nevertheless, at the individual level, patient considerations are critical as some people may decide that this amount of average health gain does not justify taking daily medication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.