ArticleBMC research notes2024
Cost-effectiveness analysis of anticoagulation options for non-valvular atrial fibrillation in Iran.
Article in BMC research notes, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Challenges in warfarin versus DOACs for elderly atrial fibrillation: A critique of Takagi and Ueda's study.Journal of arrhythmia · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) imposes a substantial economic and clinical burden, particularly in developing countries like Iran. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of anticoagulation options for non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in Iran.
methodsWe conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing warfarin, apixaban, dabigatran 110 mg, dabigatran 150 mg, and rivaroxaban for NVAF patients from the Iranian payer's perspective. A Markov model with a lifetime horizon was used to estimate costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The model incorporated clinical event rates, case-fatality rates, and utility values. Uncertainty was assessed using deterministic sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.
resultsAmong the interventions, warfarin had the lowest cost ($1,755) but apixaban resulted in the highest QALYs (7.33). Apixaban was the most cost-effective strategy with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $2,026 per QALY gained compared to warfarin. Apixaban dominated other treatments, with lower costs and higher QALYs. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that at Iran's willingness-to-pay threshold of $4,387 per QALY gained, apixaban had a high probability of being cost-effective (88.2%).
conclusionOur study provides strong evidence for healthcare decision-makers in Iran, showing that apixaban is a cost-effective treatment for NVAF, potentially enhancing patient outcomes and optimizing healthcare expenditures.
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.