[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-445714-105":59,"doc-detail-445714-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","advancing-global-health-technology-assessment-practices-evaluating-immediate-versus-five-year-risk-guided-cardiovascular-prevention-strategies-in-australia-pp52-summary","Advancing Global Health Technology Assessment Practices: Evaluating Immediate Versus Five-Year Risk-Guided Cardiovascular Prevention Strategies In Australia - PP52 - Summary","","Advancing Global Health Technology Assessment Practices evaluates cardiovascular prevention strategies in Australia by comparing immediate intervention at age 40 for risk-factor control against the guideline-based approach that starts treatment only when 5-year CVD risk reaches 10%. A causal-microsimulation model built from UK Biobank profiles projects outcomes from age 40 to 85, incorporating statin-related type 2 diabetes risk and discounting costs at 3%. Results show broad effectiveness, QALY gains, and cost-effectiveness in multiple risk profiles, supporting more inclusive HTA-informed prevention.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":35,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/healthcare/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/advancing-global-health-technology-assessment-practices-evaluating-immediate-versus-five-year-risk-guided-cardiovascular-prevention-strategies-in-australia-pp52-summary/445714/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/advancing-global-health-technology-assessment-practices-evaluating-immediate-versus-five-year-risk-guided-cardiovascular-prevention-strategies-in-australia-pp52-summary/445714.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Miles","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-09-29",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":24},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What problem does the study address in cardiovascular prevention guidance?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"It addresses how a five-year risk assessment may miss people with low short-term but high long-term CVD risk, potentially limiting the reach of preventive interventions.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How was the economic evaluation and modeling conducted?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"The study used a causal-microsimulation model with risk-factor profiles from the UK Biobank, projecting outcomes from age 40 to 85 and comparing early management versus treatment initiation at the 10% five-year risk threshold.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What were the main findings on effectiveness and cost-effectiveness?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Early intervention prevented CVD across almost all profiles, increased QALYs and life expectancy for a substantial portion of the population, and was cost-effective in several cases, with favorable ICERs especially for moderate long-term risk not captured by short-term assessment.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},445714,1790766461,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":34,"category_name":35,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":24,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":8,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":81,"preview_page_count":4},13056703019404,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_29158cc5080c5b710cf443261637dec0","PP51 Critical Analysis Of Budget Impact Analyses For Health Technologies In The Brazilian Supplementary Health System  \nMarina Meneses Aziz ([marinamaziz@gmail.com](marinamaziz@gmail.com)), Tayná Felicissimo Gomes de Souza Bandeira, Hérica Núbia Cardoso Cirilo and  \nMaria Angélica Pires Ferreira  \nIntroduction: Budget impact analyses are essential for decisionmaking processes regarding the incorporation of technologies into healthcare systems. Despite advancements driven by the National Committee for Health Technology Incorporation (CONITEC), the Brazilian Network for Health Technology Assessment (REBRATS), and the National Supplementary Health Agency (ANS), challenges persist in evaluating the economic impact of new technologies, including methodological inconsistencies in submitted dossiers. Methods: Reports on the critical analysis of dossiers submitted to the ANS prepared by a health technology assessment center between December 2022 and December 2024 were analyzed. Criticisms ofthe submitted dossiers were categorized into eleven topics: (i) analytical model; (ii) reference scenario; (iii) alternative scenario; (iv) time horizon; (v) target population; (vi) direct costs; (vii) market behavior;(viii) sensitivity analysis;(ix) input data;(x) output data;and(xi) final decision. Descriptive and quantitative data were used to identify patterns and methodological gaps.  \nResults: The critical analysis identified recurring issues, including underestimated target populations in 50 percent of cases and inadequate direct cost evaluations in 40 percent. These inadequacies were often linked to outdated data sources, such asthe Painel dos Dados do TISS database. Analytical models were deemed adequate in 70 percent of cases, whereas sensitivity analyses were insufficient in 30 percent of cases. Market behavior projections were conservatively estimated in 60 percent of dossiers, affecting the accuracy of budget impact projections. These methodological inconsistencies hindered the reproducibility of analyses and compromised evidence-based decision-making.  \nConclusions: The findings highlighted the need for methodological standardization in dossiers submitted to the ANS, emphasizing the need to update data sources and ensure transparency in budget impact calculations. These improvements could enhance evaluation validity and support better decision-making for technology incorporation. Future research should address strategies to reduce uncertaintiesand inconsistencies in analytical models and cost estimations.  \nPP52 Advancing Global Health Technology Assessment Practices: Evaluating Immediate Versus Five-Year Risk-Guided Cardiovascular Prevention Strategies In Australia  \nZanfina Ademi ([zanfina.ademi@monash.edu](zanfina.ademi@monash.edu)) and Jedidiah Morton  \nIntroduction: Current Australian and global cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention guidelines utilize a five-year risk assessment, potentially overlooking individuals with low short-term but high long-term CVD risk. This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of initiating intervention for risk factor control at age 40 years, regardless of calculated risk, compared with the conventional strategy recommended by guidelines, thereby advancing HTA to meet broader global health demands.  \nMethods: We employed a novel causal-microsimulation model containing 108 varied risk factor profiles from the UK Biobank, each replicated 10,000 times, to project outcomes from age 40 to 85 years. The model evaluated the effects of early low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and blood pressure management versus beginning treatment at the conventional five-year CVD risk threshold of 10 percent. Themainside effect in the model was an increased type2diabetes risk due to statin use. This trade-off was quantified in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) . Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were compared to Australia’s AUD28,000 (EUR15,631) per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold, with financial outcom","cbCail9G78AdZAJv","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCail9G78AdZAJv","pdf",33052,"English","# Introduction\n## Methods\n## Results\n## Conclusions","[{\"question\":\"What problem does the study address in cardiovascular prevention guidance?\",\"answer\":\"It addresses how a five-year risk assessment may miss people with low short-term but high long-term CVD risk, potentially limiting the reach of preventive interventions.\"},{\"question\":\"How was the economic evaluation and modeling conducted?\",\"answer\":\"The study used a causal-microsimulation model with risk-factor profiles from the UK Biobank, projecting outcomes from age 40 to 85 and comparing early management versus treatment initiation at the 10% five-year risk threshold.\"},{\"question\":\"What were the main findings on effectiveness and cost-effectiveness?\",\"answer\":\"Early intervention prevented CVD across almost all profiles, increased QALYs and life expectancy for a substantial portion of the population, and was cost-effective in several cases, with favorable ICERs especially for moderate long-term risk not captured by short-term assessment.\"}]","Advancing Global Health Technology Assessment Practices: Evaluating Immediate Versus Five-Year Risk-Guided Cardiovascular Prevention Strategies In Australia - PP52 - Summary | PDF",1790712594]