ArticleBMJ open2024
Long-term cost-effectiveness analysis of rugby fans in training-New Zealand: a body weight reduction programme for males.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe sought to extrapolate the long-term costs and clinical impacts attributed to the rugby fans in training-New Zealand (RUFIT-NZ) trial in Aotearoa, New Zealand.
designA modelled cost-effectiveness analysis using efficacy data from RUFIT-NZ was conducted from the Aotearoa New Zealand healthcare perspective.
settingA Markov cohort model was constructed with a lifetime time horizon. The model simulated events of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) occurring among a hypothetical cohort of 10 000 individuals receiving either the RUFIT-NZ intervention or no intervention. Efficacy data were based on the RUFIT-NZ trial, and the latest Global Burden of Disease study was used to extrapolate the impact of body weight reduction on clinical outcomes of T2DM, MI or stroke. Cost and utility data were drawn from the RUFIT-NZ trial and published sources. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).
resultsOver a lifetime time horizon, participants in the RUFIT-NZ intervention gained 0.02 (discounted) quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at an additional cost of NZ$863, relative to no intervention. The estimated ICER was NZ$49 515 per QALY gained (discounted), which is above the arbitrary willingness-to-pay threshold of NZ$45 000 per QALY. Sensitivity analyses supported the robustness of these findings.
conclusionsRUFIT-NZ was associated with a reduction in cardiovascular and endocrine events for overweight and obese males. However, based on conservative assumptions, RUFIT-NZ was unlikely to be cost-effective from a healthcare system perspective. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12619000069156.
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.