Evidence mapPaperPMID 33127013Full record

ArticleValue in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research2020

Costing the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Exploratory Economic Evaluation of Hypothetical Suppression Policy in the United Kingdom.

Darshan Zala, Iris Mosweu, Simone Critchlow, Renee Romeo, Paul McCrone

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Diagnostics and Treatments of COVID-19: A Living Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Cost-Effectiveness of COVID-19 Policy Measures: A Systematic Review.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2021
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Estimating US Earnings Loss Associated with COVID-19 Based on Human Capital Calculation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Health Economics of Interventions to Tackle the Coronavirus 2019 Pandemic.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. The Role of Health Economics and Outcomes Research in Addressing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Darshan ZalaZALA PRMA Limited, Warrington, UK. Electronic address: darshanzala@hotmail.co.uk.
Iris MosweuDepartment of Health Policy, Cowdray House, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.
Simone CritchlowDelta Hat Limited, Long Eaton, UK.
Renee RomeoDepartment of Health Service and Population Research, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College, London, UK.
Paul McCroneCentre for Mental Health, Institute for Lifecourse Development, University of Greenwich, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aims to cost and calculate the relative cost-effectiveness of the hypothetical suppression policies found in the Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team model.

methodsKey population-level disease projections in deaths, intensive care unit bed days, and non-intensive care unit bed days were taken from the Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team report of March 2020, which influenced the decision to introduce suppression policies in the United Kingdom. National income loss estimates were from a study that estimated the impact of a hypothetical pandemic on the UK economy, with sensitivity analyses based on projections that are more recent. Individual quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) loss and costed resource use inputs were taken from published sources.

resultsImperial model projected suppression polices compared to an unmitigated pandemic, even with the most pessimistic national income loss scenarios under suppression (10%), give incremental cost-effectiveness ratios below £50 000 per QALY. Assuming a maximum reduction in national income of 7.75%, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for Imperial model projected suppression versus mitigation are below 60 000 per QALY.

conclusionsResults are uncertain and conditional on the accuracy of the Imperial model projections; they are also sensitive to estimates of national income loss. Nevertheless, it would be difficult to claim that the hypothetical Imperial model-projected suppression policies are obviously cost-ineffective relative to the alternatives available. Despite evolving differences between government policy and Imperial model-projected suppression policy, it is hoped this article will provide some early insight into the trade-offs that are involved.

Indexed as

BetacoronavirusCoronavirus InfectionsCost-Benefit AnalysisCOVID-19Disease EradicationHealth PolicyHumansPandemicsPneumonia, ViralQuality-Adjusted Life YearsSARS-CoV-2United Kingdomcoronaviruscost-effectivenessCOVID-19economic evaluationmitigationsuppressionUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID33127013
PMCPMC7833705

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.