Advancing, promoting and sharing knowledge of health through excellence in teaching, clinical practice and research into the prevention and treatment of illness

Coronary heart disease policy models: a systematic review.

Unal, B; Capewell, S; Critchley, JA (2006) Coronary heart disease policy models: a systematic review. BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, 6 (213). ISSN 1471-2458
SGUL Authors: Critchley, Julia

["document_typename_application/pdf; charset=binary" not defined] Published Version
Download (344kB) | Preview


BACKGROUND: The prevention and treatment of coronary heart disease (CHD) is complex. A variety of models have therefore been developed to try and explain past trends and predict future possibilities. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the strengths and limitations of existing CHD policy models. METHODS: A search strategy was developed, piloted and run in MEDLINE and EMBASE electronic databases, supplemented by manually searching reference lists of relevant articles and reviews. Two reviewers independently checked the papers for inclusion and appraisal. All CHD modelling studies were included which addressed a defined population and reported on one or more key outcomes (deaths prevented, life years gained, mortality, incidence, prevalence, disability or cost of treatment). RESULTS: In total, 75 articles describing 42 models were included; 12 (29%) of the 42 models were micro-simulation, 8 (19%) cell-based, and 8 (19%) life table analyses, while 14 (33%) used other modelling methods. Outcomes most commonly reported were cost-effectiveness (36%), numbers of deaths prevented (33%), life-years gained (23%) or CHD incidence (23%). Among the 42 models, 29 (69%) included one or more risk factors for primary prevention, while 8 (19%) just considered CHD treatments. Only 5 (12%) were comprehensive, considering both risk factors and treatments. The six best-developed models are summarised in this paper, all are considered in detail in the appendices. CONCLUSION: Existing CHD policy models vary widely in their depth, breadth, quality, utility and versatility. Few models have been calibrated against observed data, replicated in different settings or adequately validated. Before being accepted as a policy aid, any CHD model should provide an explicit statement of its aims, assumptions, outputs, strengths and limitations.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: © 2006 Unal et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Keywords: Coronary Disease, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Databases, Bibliographic, Decision Support Techniques, Health Policy, Health Promotion, Humans, Outcome Assessment (Health Care), Quality-Adjusted Life Years, Science & Technology, Life Sciences & Biomedicine, Public, Environmental & Occupational Health, RISK-FACTOR CHANGES, COST-EFFECTIVENESS, HEALTH-CARE, CARDIOVASCULAR-DISEASE, SECONDARY-PREVENTION, GLOBAL BURDEN, TREATING HYPERLIPIDEMIA, REDUCTASE INHIBITORS, LIFE EXPECTANCY, MORTALITY
SGUL Research Institute / Research Centre: Academic Structure > Population Health Research Institute (INPH)
Journal or Publication Title: BMC PUBLIC HEALTH
ISSN: 1471-2458
Related URLs:
18 August 2006Published
Web of Science ID: WOS:000240477500001
Download EPMC Full text (PDF)
Download EPMC Full text (HTML)
Publisher's version:


Item downloaded times since 01 May 2012.

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item