Cited by 23Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeDiabetes Management and EducationDiabetes Treatment and Management

A cost-effectiveness analysis of a telephone-linked care intervention for individuals with Type 2 diabetes

Open access
Gordon, L.G., Bird, D., Oldenburg, B., Friedman, R.H., Russell, A.W., Scuffham, P.A.·2014·Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice

Abstract

Aim To assess the cost-effectiveness of an automated telephone-linked care intervention, Australian TLC Diabetes, delivered over 6 months to patients with established Type 2 diabetes mellitus and high glycated haemoglobin level, compared to usual care.Methods A Markov model was designed to synthesize data from a randomized controlled trial of TLC Diabetes (n=120) and other published evidence. The 5-year model consisted of three health states related to glycaemic control: 'sub-optimal' HbA1c ≥58mmol/mol (7.5%); 'average' ≥48-57mmol/mol (6.5-7.4%) and 'optimal' <48mmol/mol (6.5%) and a fourth state 'all-cause death'. Key outcomes of the model include discounted health system costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYS) using SF-6D utility weights. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken.Results Annual medication costs for the intervention group were lower than usual care [Intervention £1076 (95%CI: £947, £1206) versus usual care £1271 (95%CI: £1115, £1428) p=0.052]. The estimated mean cost for intervention group participants over five years, including the intervention cost, was £17,152 versus £17,835 for the usual care group. The corresponding mean QALYs were 3.381 (SD 0.40) for the intervention group and 3.377 (SD 0.41) for the usual care group. Results were sensitive to the model duration, utility values and medication costs.Conclusion The Australian TLC Diabetes intervention was a low-cost investment for individuals with established diabetes and may result in medication cost-savings to the health system. Although QALYs were similar between groups, other benefits arising from the intervention should also be considered when determining the overall value of this strategy.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.diabres.2013.12.032

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gordon, L. G., Bird, D., Oldenburg, B., Friedman, R. H., Russell, A. W., & Scuffham, P. A.
Affiliations
  • Griffith University (AU)
  • Queensland University of Technology (AU)
  • Monash University (AU)
  • Boston University (US)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
Venue
Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-04
Volume
104
Issue
1
Pages
103-111
ISSN
0168-8227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2089637970
Cited by
23
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
4.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion)
  • Faculty of Health; Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation
Funders
National Health Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Early Career Fellowship (496714)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, cost-effectiveness, glycemic control, HbA1c, drug costs, quality-adjusted life years, Markov model
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Blood Glucose, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Telephone, Health Care Costs, Telemedicine, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review