ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Cost-effectiveness analysis of population-based
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Willingness to contribute monetarily for hereditary breast cancer risk testing and the influencing factors: The first Indonesian exploration in the province with the highest prevalence.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2026Article
- Theranostic Smart Bionanosensors for Solid Tumors: Advances, Challenges, and Future Directions.Applied biochemistry and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Limited inclusion in clinical trials and access to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors in racial and ethnic minority patients with cancer: a narrative review.The oncologist · 2026Review
- 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The women's cancer screening program has been operational for several years in China, primarily utilizing palpation and ultrasound. Given the proven impact of Methods: We constructed a decision tree model to compare the cost-effectiveness of three strategies: symptom-based screening only (Symptom-only strategy), population-based Results: The FH-based strategy was found to be cost-effective compared to the Symptom-only strategy (ICER: ¥185,710/QALY, gaining 0.26 days' life expectancy). Its cost-effectiveness was significantly influenced by the risks of ovarian and breast cancer among Conclusion: Incorporating family-history-based
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.