Research Article
Cost-Effectiveness of a Short Message Service Intervention to Prevent Type 2 Diabetes from Impaired Glucose Tolerance
Table 4
Results of sensitivity analyses.
| Parameters | Base-case | Range for sensitivity analysis | Range for incremental cost (USD) | Range for cost per LYs gained |
| SMS drop-out rate at year 1 | 38.89% | 0.00%–100.00% | −1669.66 to 0.00 | Dominance | SMS drop-out rate at year 2 | 30.30% | 0.00%–100.00% | −1131.28 to −765.21 | Dominance | Annual transition probability | | | | | From IGT to T2DM, control at year 1–3 | 10.42% | 9.34%–11.57% | −950.73 to −761.82 | Dominance | From IGT to T2DM, SMS at year 1 | 3.53% | 0.93%–11.57% | −1324.36 to −76.21 | Dominance | From IGT to T2DM, SMS at year 2 | 6.25% | 0.93%–11.57% | −1352.05 to −688.20 | Dominance | From IGT to NGT | 16.20% | 5.00%–25.00% | − 922.28 to −1063.06 | Dominance | From NGT to IGT | 16.30% | 5.00%–25.00% | −1117.45 to −979.19 | Dominance | RR of mortality in IGT | 1.5 | 1.1–2.0 | −1015.49 to −1026.04 | Dominance | RR of mortality in T2DM | 2.3 | 1.6–3.2 | −1087.30 to −953.95 | Dominance | Discount rate | 3.00% | 0.00%–5.00% | −1450.41 to −836.95 | Dominance |
|
|
Note: NGT = normal glucose tolerance; IGT = impaired glucose tolerance; T2DM = type 2 diabetes mellitus; RR = relative risk.
|