ArticleJAMA network open2022
Projected Return on Investment From Implementation of a Lifestyle Intervention to Reduce Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes.
Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Key Components of Antenatal Lifestyle Interventions to Optimize Gestational Weight Gain: Secondary Analysis of a Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2023Pooled it
- Polyendocrine metabolic ovarian syndrome in pregnancy: pathophysiology and outcomes.Nature reviews. Endocrinology · 2026Review
- Effects of Combined Diet and Physical Activity on Gestational Weight Gain in Low-Risk Pregnant Women Based on the TIDieR Checklist: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Building on the Doha Declaration: a white paper on advancing lifestyle medicine for non-communicable disease prevention and health system transformation.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes and Health System Costs in Standard Public Maternity Care Compared to Private Obstetric-Led Care: A Population-Level Matched Cohort Study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Observational
- Analyzing electronic medical records to extract prepregnancy morbidities and pregnancy complications: Toward a learning health system.Learning health systems · 2025Article
- The value of maternity care in Queensland, 2012-18, based on an analysis of administrative data: a retrospective observational study.The Medical journal of Australia · 2023Observational
- Long-term cost-effectiveness of implementing a lifestyle intervention during pregnancy to reduce the incidence of gestational diabetes and type 2 diabetes.Diabetologia · 2023Article
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
Importance: Structured antenatal diet and physical activity interventions have been shown to be associated with reduced adverse pregnancy outcomes and recommended to be routinely offered to all pregnant women. The health cost implications of population-level implementation are unclear. Objective: To estimate the budget impact associated with integrating structured diet and physical activity interventions into routine antenatal care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation was conducted from the perspective of Australian health funders. An open-source decision-tree model was constructed to compare the projected budget outcomes of implementing lifestyle intervention vs usual care. Scenario, deterministic, and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were completed. The study setting was Australian health services, and the study population was all Australian women projected to give birth in the years 2022 to 2026 (approximately 330 000 per year). Interventions: Structured diet and physical activity intervention provided by trained health professionals, integrated into routine antenatal care. Comparator was usual care, which currently in Australia does not include routine structured lifestyle interventions. Main Outcomes and Measures: Return on investment (ROI) ratio for lifestyle intervention (cost of intervention divided by cost savings attributable to reduced maternal and infant adverse events) from the perspective of Australian health care funders. Adverse events were obtained from a published meta-analysis and population data. Costs were estimated from aggregate trial data and clinical pathways and valued at the year incurred. Results: Intervention offered an ROI ratio of 4.75 over the 5-year program; hence every Australian dollar spent on implementation produced an estimated return of A$4.75. The projected total 5-year intervention cost was A$205 million ($151 million), with cost offsets (from reduced incidence of adverse pregnancy outcomes) of A$1022 million ($755 million), and health budget savings of A$807 million (95% CI, A$129 million to A$1639 million) ($596 million [95% CI, $95 million to $1211 million]); 93.3% of the 10 000 iterations were within cost saving, and results were robust to scenario and sensitivity analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: This economic evaluation found that providing access to structured diet and physical activity lifestyle interventions for all pregnant Australian women was estimated to provide strong return on investment for health funders. The open-source model developed can be used by other jurisdictions and health services to explore cost implications of implementation within their patient population.
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.