ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2025
A Scoping Review on the Economic Impacts of Healthy Ageing Promotion and Disease Prevention in OECD Member Countries.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2025. 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.
- A Multidimensional Definition of Pre-Osteoarthritis: Toward 21st-Century Subclinical Detection and Targeted Intervention.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The economic impact of health promotion and disease prevention interventions in ageing populations remains debated, as theories of morbidity compression and expansion offer contrasting views on the relationship between life expectancy and duration of morbidity. A MEDLINE search was conducted to identify studies evaluating the economic impact of health promotion or primary or secondary prevention interventions in OECD countries, over a lifetime time horizon. Among the 29 studies included, 16 reported cost-saving interventions (reducing costs while improving health outcomes), 11 reported cost-effective interventions (health gains at an acceptable additional cost based on an established threshold), and two presented cost-ineffective interventions (costs exceeding the threshold for the health benefits achieved). Interventions targeting diabetes and obesity prevention were cost-saving; cancer screening and fall prevention strategies were cost-effective; whereas interventions targeting rare diseases were cost-ineffective. Regulatory interventions were also cost-saving, while most programme-based interventions were cost-effective. Cost-saving or cost-effective interventions generally adopted broader analytical perspectives, while cost-ineffective ones employed narrower perspectives. The four studies that incorporated competing risks-despite using a narrower healthcare sector perspective-still found the interventions to be cost-saving or cost-effective interventions. None of the included studies assessed whether interventions led to morbidity compression or expansion. Only a few studies considered equity impact; those that did reported improved outcomes for disadvantaged groups, in regulatory and community-based interventions. Further research is needed to quantify morbidity outcomes and enhance methodological consistency, particularly with respect to analytical perspectives, the integration of competing risks, and the inclusion of equity analyses.
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.