Cited by 22Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular PreventionDiabetes Management and Research

Cost-effectiveness of type 2 diabetes screening: results from recently published studies

Open access
Icks, A, Rathmann, W, Haastert, B, John, J, Löwel, H, Holle, R, Giani, G·2005·Das Gesundheitswesen

Abstract

Type 2 diabetes screening is recommended by various international diabetes associations. We conducted a literature research to identify and describe systematically recently published cost effectiveness analyses (CEA) for type 2 diabetes screening. Three analyses were included. One of them was conducted in Germany, based on the data of the KORA survey S4 (1999/2001). Two studies came from the US. The German as well as one of the US studies evaluated cost per detected diabetic case as main outcome. In contrast to the US study, the German study considered incomplete participation in the screening programs as baseline case. HbA1 c testing combined with the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was more expensive than OGTT or fasting glucose testing, but also most effective in detecting cases, due to high participation in this screening strategy. The second US study investigated the lifetime cost effectiveness of type 2 diabetes screening, based on a Markov model to calculate cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Effectiveness data were derived from two large intervention studies in clinically diagnosed (not identified by screening) diabetic subjects. The authors conclude that type 2 diabetes screening is cost effective, in particular targeted screening in elderly hypertensive subjects. Diabetes screening may be cost effective. However, the effectiveness of early detection and treatment of type 2 diabetes has not yet been shown, and data regarding the course of early detected diabetes are lacking so far. In the future, the most important question is whether type 2 diabetes screening and early treatment is effective with respect to clinical outcomes.

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 · 10.1055/s-2005-858232

Cites

24 of 24 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

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. [5]5. Streets P. Undiagnosed diabetes must be detected. BMJ 2001; 323: 453 -454
  2. [6]6. Harris MI, Eastman RC. Early detection of undiagnosed diabetes melli- tus: a US perspective. Diabetes and Metabolism Research and Reviews 2000; 16: 230 -236
  3. [11]11. Engelgau M, Venkat Narayan K, Thomson T et al. The cost-effective- ness of screening for type 2 diabetes. JAMA 1998; 280: 1757 -1763
  4. [14]14. Lee DS, Remington P, Madagame J et al. A cost analysis of community screening for diabetes in the Central Wisconsin Medicare population. Wisconsin Medical Journal 2000; 99: 39 -44 16
  5. [16]16. Zhang P, Engelgau M, Valdez R et al. Cost of screening for pre-diabetes among US adults. Diabetes Care 2003; 26: 2536 -2542
  6. [19]19. Drummond MF, O'Brien BJ, Stoddart GL et al. Methods fort he econom- ic evaluation of health care programs. 2nd edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997 21 BMJ. Checklist for Health Economic Papers. www.bmj.com

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Icks, A., Rathmann, W., Haastert, B., John, J., Löwel, H., Holle, R., & Giani, G.
Affiliations
  • Deutsches Diabetes-Zentrum e.V. (DE)
  • Helmholtz Munich (DE)
Venue
Das Gesundheitswesen
Published
2005-07-20
Volume
67
Issue
S 01
Pages
167-171
ISSN
  • 0941-3790 (ISSN-L)
  • 1439-4421
OpenAlex
W2002045144
Cited by
22
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
8.96
Type
journal article
Language
de
Open access
Locations
  • Das Gesundheitswesen (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Site cant be reached (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
Keywords
type 2 diabetes screening, cost-effectiveness, HbA1c testing, oral glucose tolerance test, cost per quality-adjusted life year, early detection of diabetes
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Clinical Trials as Topic, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Germany, Humans, Male, Mass Screening, Middle Aged, Population Surveillance, Registries, United States, Health Care Costs, Models, Economic

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