Supplementary appendix

Supplementary Fig.1: Project approach and search strategy methodology

MS: Microsoft; HTA: Health technology assessment; QC: Quality control

Supplementary table 1: database search strategies (searched on 28 November 2014)

Supplementary table 1a) Embase® and MEDLINE® searches using Embase.com platform

# / Search terms / Facet / Hits
1 / 'insulin dependent diabetes mellitus'/syn OR 'diabetes mellitus type 1' OR 'diabetes mellitus type i' OR 'diabetes mellitus, insulin-dependent' OR 'diabetes mellitus, type 1' OR 'diabetes mellitus, type i' OR 'diabetes mellitus, brittle' OR 'diabetes mellitus, insulin dependent' OR 'diabetes mellitus, juvenile onset' OR 'diabetes type 1' OR 'diabetes type i' OR 'diabetes, juvenile' OR 'dm 1' OR 'early onset diabetes mellitus' OR 'iddm' OR 'insulin dependent diabetes' OR 'juvenile diabetes' OR 'juvenile diabetes mellitus' OR 'juvenile onset diabetes' OR 'juvenile onset diabetes mellitus' OR 'ketoacidotic diabetes' OR 'labile diabetes mellitus' OR 'brittle diabetes' OR 'brittle diabetes mellitus' OR 'mckusick 22210' OR 'type 1 diabetes' OR 'type 1 diabetes mellitus' OR 'type i diabetes' OR 'type i diabetes mellitus' / Disease facet / 227,012
2 / 'type 1 diabetes' OR 'type 1 diabetic' OR 'type i diabetes' OR 'type i diabetic' / 45,895
3 / child* NEAR/2 diabet* / 16,000
4 / acidos* NEAR/2 diabet* / 690
5 / labil* NEAR/2 diabet* / 110
6 / britt* NEAR/2 diabet* / 394
7 / keto* NEAR/2 diabet* / 9,781
8 / juvenil* NEAR/2 diabet* / 3,733
9 / autoimmun* NEAR/2 diabet* / 4,839
10 / auto AND immun* NEAR/2 diabet* / 118
11 / sudden AND onset NEAR/2 diabet* / 78
12 / #1 OR #2 OR #3 OR #4 OR #5 OR #6 OR #7 OR #8 OR #9 OR #10 OR #11 / 243,419
13 / 'cost effectiveness analysis'/syn OR 'cost benefit analysis'/syn OR 'cost utility analysis'/syn OR 'cost minimization analysis'/syn OR 'economic evaluation'/syn OR (economic OR 'cost-benefit' OR 'cost-effectiveness' OR 'cost-utility') NEXT/1 (evaluation* OR analys* OR model* OR intervention*) OR ('cost minimization' OR 'cost minimisation') NEXT/1 (analys* OR model*) OR economic NEXT/1 (evaluation* OR model) / Study design / 2,37,687
14 / #12 AND #13 / Combination facet / 3891
15 / #12 AND #13 NOT ([editorial]/lim OR [letter]/lim) / Limits / 3537
16 / #15 AND [1995-2014]/py / Final numbers / 3462

Supplementary table 1b) Cochrane search strategy

# / Search terms / Facet / Hits
1 / MeSH descriptor: [Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1] explode all trees / Disease / 3,242
2 / IDDM or T1DM or T1D / 862
3 / ("insulin* depend*" or "insulin-depend*") not ("non insulin* depend*" or "non insulin-depend*") / 1,749
4 / ("typ? 1 diabet*" or "typ?1diabet*" or "typ? I diabet*" or "typ?I diabet*") / 2,767
5 / Child* near/2 diabet* / 560
6 / acidos* near/2 diabet* / 16
7 / labil* near/2 diabet* / 3
8 / britt* near/2 diabet* / 21
9 / keto* near/2 diabet* / 250
10 / juvenil* near/2 diabet* / 105
11 / autoimmun* near/2 diabet* / 64
12 / auto and (immun* near/2 diabet*) / 5
13 / sudden and (onset near/2 diabet*) / 34
14 / (#1 or #2 or #3 or #4 or #5 or #6 or #7 or #8 or #9 or #10 or #11 or #12 or #13) / Combination facet / 5238
15 / #14 AND Publication Year from 1995 to 2014, in Technology Assessments and Economic Evaluations / Final numbers / 215

Supplementary table 1c) MEDLINE® in-process search strategy searched via PubMed® platform

# / Search terms / Facet / Hits
1 / "insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus” OR "insulin dependent diabetes mellitus” OR “diabetes mellitus, insulin-dependent” OR “diabetes mellitus, insulin dependent” OR “iddm” OR “insulin dependent diabetes” / Disease / 22,145
2 / “diabetes mellitus type 1” OR “diabetes mellitus type i” OR “diabetes mellitus, type 1” OR “diabetes mellitus, type i” PR “diabetes type 1” OR “diabetes type i” OR “dm 1” OR “type 1 diabetes” OR “type 1 diabetes mellitus” OR “type i diabetes” OR “type i diabetes mellitus” / 69,515
3 / “diabetes mellitus, juvenile onset” OR “juvenile diabetes mellitus” OR “juvenile onset diabetes” OR “juvenile onset diabetes mellitus” OR “juvenile diabetes” OR “diabetes, juvenile” / 63,969
4 / “diabetes mellitus, brittle” OR “early onset diabetes mellitus” OR “ketoacidotic diabetes” OR “labile diabetes mellitus” OR “brittle diabetes” OR “brittle diabetes mellitus” OR “mckusick 22210” / 63,020
5 / #1 OR #2 OR #3 OR #4 / 81,450
6 / “pharmacoeconomics“ OR “cost-effectiveness” OR “cost-utility” OR “cost utility” OR “Cost benefit” OR “Cost minimisation” OR “Cost minimization” OR “budget impact” OR “cost consequence” OR "health care cost" OR “economic evaluation” OR "health economics" / Study design / 94,789
7 / (#5 AND #6) AND (pubstatusaheadofprint OR inprocess[sb]) / Final numbers / 12

Supplementary table 2: Checklist of information to extract for each identified model

Parameter / Inclusion/exclusion criteria
Study details /
  • Study name
  • Year and journal of publication
  • Type of evaluation
  • Study objective
  • Eligibility criteria and definition of study population and patient subgroups (if any)
  • Cost year and currency(ies)
  • Inclusion/exclusion criteria
  • Country(ies)
  • Intervention and comparator details
  • Author’s conclusions and comments

Population characteristics /
  • Mean/median age
  • Gender percentages
  • Ethnicity (percent)
  • Body mass index

Basic modelling methodologies /
  • Perspective (healthcare payer, societal)
  • Markov or discrete event structure or other types
  • Simulation method (cohort, patient-level)
  • Capture 2nd order (parameter) uncertainty
  • Analysis timeframe
  • Discounting

Model structure (and key data sources/risk equations) /
  • Baseline characteristics and subgroups analyses
  • T1DM complications included and excluded
  • Adverse events included
  • Incorporation of baseline risk of T1DM complications
  • Incorporation of treatment effects
  • Incorporation of health related quality of life
  • Incorporation of resource use and costs (direct & indirect)

Data inputs for the included applications /
  • Sources and availability (baseline risk, efficacy, quality of life, resource use)
  • Statistical analyses (risk equations)

Model outcomes /
  • Health utility outcomes (QALYs, LYGs)
  • Other outcomes (life years and diabetes-related events)

HTA insight /
  • Usage of model in HTA submissions
  • Outcome (HTA evaluation result)

Model validation /
  • Internal validation procedures
  • External validation procedures

Supplementary table 3: Summary of secondary publications associated with the models included in the review

Model / Primary publication / Secondary publication
The DCCT Model / Nathan 1996 [1] / Dong 2004 [2]
Eastman 2003 [3]
Meltzer 2000 [4]
Huang 2010 [5]
Greeley 2011 [6]
The Tomar Model / Tomar 1998 [7] / Wu 1998 [8]
The Scuffham Model / Scuffham 2003 [9] / -
The CDM Model / Palmer 2004
[10] / Cummins 2007 [11]
Palmer 2004 [12]
Palmer 2004 [13]
Roze 2005 [14]
Valentine 2006 [15]
Cohen 2007 [16]
Palmer 2007 [17]
Tunis 2008 [18]
Gschwend 2009 [19]
Pratoomsoot 2009 [20]
St 2009 [21]
Charles 2009 [22]
Cameron 2009 [23]
Tunis 2009 [24]
Giardina 2009 [25]
Balenger 2009 [26]
Belanger 2009 [27]
Van 2010 [28]
Ning 2010 [29]
Valentine 2011 [30]
Guillermin 2011 [31]
Kamble 2011 [32]
Kamble 2012 [33]
Roze 2012 [34]
Roze 2012 [35]
Quiroz 2012 [36]
Gomez 2013 [37]
Roze 2013 [38]
Roze 2013 [39]
Roze 2013 [40]
McEwan 2014 [41]
Roze 2014 [42]
Roze 2014 [43]
Roze 2014 [44]
Roze 2014 [45]
Zulewski 2014 [46]
Evans 2014 [47]
Beaudet 2014 [48]
Palmer 2000 [49]
Palmer 2000 [50]
The CRC DES Model / McEwan 2007 [51] / Pfohl 2012 [52]
The Shearer Model / Shearer 2004 [53] / -
The EAGLE model / Mueller 2006 [54] / -
The Grima Model / Grima 2007 [55] / -
The Airoldi Model / Airoldi 2008 [56] / -
The Beckwith Model / Beckwith 2012 [57] / Beckwith 2010 [58]
Schuurman 2010 [59]
The Sheffield Type 1 Diabetes Policy Model / Kruger 2013 [60] / Thokala 2014 [61]
Basarir 2014 [62]
Kruger 2013 [63]
Thokala 2012 [64]
Thokala 2012 [65]
Kruger 2012 [66]
Kruger 2012 [67]
Kruger 2012 [68]
Kruger 2011 [69]
Kruger 2013 [70]
The McQueen Model / McQueen 2011 [71] / -
The Archimedes Model / Eddy 2003 [72] / Eddy 2003 [73]
Schlessinger 2002 [74]

Reference list

1. Nathan DM. Lifetime benefits and costs of intensive therapy as practiced in the diabetes control and complications trial. Journal of the American Medical Association 1996; 276(17):1409-1415.

2. Dong FB, Sorensen SW, Manninen DL, Thompson TJ, Narayan V, Orians CE et al. Cost effectiveness of ACE inhibitor treatment for patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. PharmacoEconomics 2004; 22(15):1015-1027.

3. Eastman RC, Leptien AD, Chase HP. Cost-effectiveness of use of the GlucoWatch(registered trademark) Biographer in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: A preliminary analysis based on a randomized controlled trial. Pediatric Diabetes 2003; 4(2):82-86.

4. Meltzer D, Egleston B, Stoffel D, Dasbach E. Effect of future costs on cost-effectiveness of medical interventions among young adults: the example of intensive therapy for type 1 diabetes mellitus. Medical care 2000; 38(6):679-685.

5. Huang ES. The cost-effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2010; 33(6):1269-1274.

6. Greeley SAW, John PM, Winn AN, Ornelas J, Lipton RB, Philipson LH et al. The cost-effectiveness of personalized genetic medicine: The case of genetic testing in neonatal diabetes. Diabetes Care 2011; 34(3):622-627.

7. Tomar RH, Lee S, Wu SY, Klein R, Klein BE, Moss SE et al. Disease progression and cost of insulin dependent diabetes mellitus: development and application of a simulation model. J Soc Health Syst 1998; 5(4):24-37.

8. Wu SY, Sainfort F, Tomar RH, Tollios JL, Fryback DG, Klein R et al. Development and application of a model to estimate the impact of type 1 diabetes on health-related quality of life. Diabetes Care 1998; 21(5):725-731.

9. Scuffham P, Carr L. The cost-effectiveness of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion compared with multiple daily injections for the management of diabetes. Diabetic Medicine 2003; 20(7):586-593.

10. Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, Minshall ME, Foos V, Lurati FM et al. The CORE Diabetes Model: Projecting long-term clinical outcomes, costs and cost-effectiveness of interventions in diabetes mellitus (types 1 and 2) to support clinical and reimbursement decision-making. Current Medical Research and Opinion 2004; 20(SUPPL. 1):S5-S26.

11. Cummins E, Royle P, Snaith A, Greene A, Robertson L, McIntyre L et al. Clinical and cost-effectiveness of continuous subcutaneous infusion for diabetes: updating review. Health Technology Assessment (NICE ) 2007.

12. Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, Minshall ME, Foos V, Lurati FM et al. Validation of the CORE diabetes model against epidemiological and clinical studies. Current Medical Research and Opinion 2004; 20(SUPPL. 1):S27-S40.

13. Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, Minshall ME, Lammert M, Nicklasson L et al. Deleterious effects of increased body weight associated with intensive insulin therapy for type 1 diabetes: Increased blood pressure and worsened lipid profile partially negate improvements in life expectancy. Current Medical Research and Opinion 2004; 20(SUPPL. 1):S67-S73.

14. Roze S, Valentine WJ, Zakrzewska KE, Palmer AJ. Health-economic comparison of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion with multiple daily injection for the treatment of Type 1 diabetes in the UK. Diabetic Medicine 2005; 22(9):1239-1245.

15. Valentine WJ, Palmer AJ, Erny-Albrecht KM, Ray JA, Cobden D, Foos V et al. Cost-effectiveness of basal insulin from a US health system perspective: Comparative analyses of detemir, glargine and NPH. Advances in Therapy 2006; 23(2):191-207.

16. Cohen N, Minshall ME, Sharon-Nash L, Zakrzewska K, Valentine WJ, Palmer AJ. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion versus multiple daily injections of insulin: Economic comparison in adult and adolescent type 1 diabetes mellitus in Australia. PharmacoEconomics 2007; 25(10):881-897.

17. Palmer AJ, Valentine WJ, Ray JA, Foos V, Lurati F, Smith I et al. An economic assessment of analogue basal-bolus insulin versus human basal-bolus insulin in subjects with type 1 diabetes in the UK. Current Medical Research and Opinion 2007; 23(4):895-901.

18. Tunis SL, Minshall ME. The impact of clinical trial design on cost-effectiveness analyses: Illustration from a published study of the One-Touch(registered trademark) Ultrasmart(registered trademark) blood glucose meter for insulin-using diabetes patients. Diabetes Technology and Therapeutics 2008; 10(3):227-231.

19. Gschwend MH, Aagren M, Valentine WJ. Cost-effectiveness of insulin detemir compared with neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes using a basal-bolus regimen in five European countries. Journal of Medical Economics 2009; 12(2):114-123.

20. Pratoomsoot C, Smith HT, Kalsekar A, Boye KS, Arellano J, Valentine WJ. An estimation of the long-term clinical and economic benefits of insulin lispro in Type 1 diabetes in the UK. Diabetic Medicine 2009; 26(8):803-814.

21. St C, Lynch P, Graham C, Minshall ME. A cost-effectiveness analysis of continuous subcutaneous insulin injection versus multiple daily injections in type 1 diabetes patients: A third-party us payer perspective. Value in Health 2009; 12(5):674-686.

22. Charles MES, Sadri H, Minshall ME, Tunis SL. Health economic comparison between continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and multiple daily injections of insulin for the treatment of adult type 1 diabetes in Canada. Clinical Therapeutics 2009; 31(3):657-667.

23. Cameron CG, Bennett B. Cost-effectiveness of insulin analogues for diabetes mellitus. CMAJ 2009; 180(4):400-407.

24. Tunis SL, Minshall ME, Conner C, McCormick JI, Kapor J, Yale JF et al. Cost-effectiveness of insulin detemir compared to NPH insulin for type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus in the Canadian payer setting: Modeling analysis. Current Medical Research and Opinion 2009; 25(5):1273-1284.

25. Giardina S, Lynch P, Papo NL. A cost-effectiveness analysis of continuous subcutaneous insulin injection vs. multiple daily injections in type-1 diabetes patients in Italy. Value in Health 2009; 12(7):A407.

26. Balenger D, Cameron CG. Economic evaluation of rapid-acting insulin analogues for the treatment of patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus in Canada. Value in Health 2009; 12(3):A100.

27. Belanger D, Cameron CG. Economic evaluation of long-acting insulin analogues for the treatment of patients with type-1 and type-2 diabetes mellitus in Canada. Value in Health 2009; 12(3):A101.

28. Van G. The cost-effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes patients in the Netherlands. Value in Health 2010; 13(7):A292.

29. Ning G, Lynch P. Cost-effectiveness of CSII in China. Value in Health 2010; 13(7):A527.

30. Valentine WJ, Aagren M, Haglund M, Ericsson A, Gschwend MH. Evaluation of the long-term cost-effectiveness of insulin detemir compared with neutral protamine hagedorn insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes using a basal-bolus regimen in Sweden. Scandinavian journal of public health 2011; 39(1):79-87.

31. Guillermin AL, Samyshkin Y, Wright D, Nguyen T, Villeneuve J. Modeling the lifetime costs of insulin glargine and insulin detemir in type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients in Canada: A meta-analysis and a cost-minimization analysis. Journal of Medical Economics 2011; 14(2):207-216.

32. Kamble S, Perry BM, Shafiroff J, Schulman KA, Reed SD. The cost-effectiveness of initiating sensor-augmented pump therapy versus multiple daily injections of insulin in adults with type 1 diabetes: Evaluating a technology in evolution. Value in Health 2011; 14(3):A82.

33. Kamble S, Schulman KA, Reed SD. Cost-effectiveness of sensor-augmented pump therapy in adults with type 1 diabetes in the United States. Value in Health 2012; 15(5):632-638.

34. Roze S, Lynch P, Cook M. Projection of long term health-economic benefits of Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) versus self monitoring of blood glucose in type 1 diabetes, a UK perspective. Diabetologia 2012; 55:S427.

35. Roze S, Valentine WJ, Hanas R, Barsoe C. Projection of health economics benefits of continuous glucose monitoring versus self monitoring of blood glucose in type 1 diabetes, in Sweden. Value in Health 2012; 15(4):A69.

36. Quiroz M, Machado F, Shafiroff J, Gill M, Molina M, Gonzalez P. Insulin pump cost-utility analysis compared to multiple daily injection in type 1 diabetic patients in the Mexican social security institute, 21st century hospital. Value in Health 2012; 15(4):A69.

37. Gomez A, Alfonso-Cristancho R, Prieto-Salamanca D, Valencia JE, Lynch P, Roze S. Health economic benefits of sensor augmented insulin pump therapy in Colombia. Value in Health 2013; 16(7):A690.

38. Roze S, Demessinov A, Zeityn M, Toktarova N, Abduakhassova G, Sissemaliev R et al. Health-economic compa rison of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion versus multiple daily injections for the treatment of adult type 1 diabetes in Kazakhstan. Value in Health 2013; 16(7):A439.

39. Roze S, Demessinov A, Zeityn M, Toktarova N, Abduakhassova G, Sissemaliev R et al. Health-economic comparison of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion versus multiple daily injections for the treatment of type 1 diabetes in Kazakhstan children. Value in Health 2013; 16(7):A439-A440.

40. Roze S, Lynch P, Brandt AS, Barsoe C, Jendle J. Health economic benefits of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus self monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technology and Therapeutics 2013; 15:A65.

41. McEwan P, Foos V, Palmer JL, Lamotte M, Lloyd A, Grant D. Validation of the IMS CORE diabetes model. Value in Health 2014; 17(6):714-724.

42. Roze S, Cook M, Jethwa M, De P. Projection of long term health-economic benefits of sensor augmented pump (SAP) versus pump therapy alone (CSII) in type 1 diabetes, a UK perspective. Value in Health 2014; 17(7):A348.

43. Roze S, Lynch P, Boncz I, Dunne N, Varga C, Klots M et al. Health-economic comparison of sensor-augmented pump with low glucose suspend versus insulin pump alone for the treatment of hypo-prone type 1 diabetes in Hungary. Value in Health 2014; 17(7):A344.

44. Roze S, Lynch P, Machova R, Micieta V, Dunne N, Klots M et al. Health-economic comparison of sensor-au gmented pump with low glucose suspend versus insulin pump alone for the treatment of hypo-prone type 1 diabetes in Slovakia. Value in Health 2014; 17(7):A345-A346.

45. Roze S, Payet V, Debroucker F, De P, Cucherat M. Projection of long term health economic benefits of sensor augmented pump (SAP) versus pump therapy alone (CSII) in uncontrolled type 1 diabetes in France. Value in Health 2014; 17(7):A348.

46. Zulewski H, Brandle M, Minder AE, Hunt B, Valentine WJ. Health economic implications of education-based flexible insulin therapy versus conventional or technology-based approaches in type 1 diabetes. Diabetologia 2014; 57(1):S13-S14.

47. Evans M, Mcewan PC, Foos V. Assessing clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec in routine clinical practice. Diabetes 2014; 63:A307.

48. Beaudet A, Ong RC. Burden of non-adherence to type 1 diabetes mellitus therapeutic guidelines in france. Value in Health 2014; 17(7):A342.

49. Palmer AJ, Brandt A, Gozzoli V, Weiss C, Stock H, Wenzel H. Outline of a diabetes disease management model: Principles and applications. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice 2000; 50(SUPPL. 3):S47-S56.

50. Palmer AJ, Weiss C, Sendi PP, Neeser K, Brandt A, Singh G et al. The cost-effectiveness of different management strategies for Type I diabetes: A Swiss perspective. Diabetologia 2000; 43(1):13-26.

51. McEwan P, Poole CD, Tetlow T, Holmes P, Currie CJ. Evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of insulin glargine versus NPH insulin for the treatment of type 1 diabetes in the UK. Current Medical Research and Opinion, Supplement 2007; 23(1):S7-S19.

52. Pfohl M, Schadlich PK, Dippel FW, Koltermann KC. Health economic evaluation of insulin glargine vs NPH insulin in intensified conventional therapy for type 1 diabetes in Germany. Journal of Medical Economics 2012; 15(SUPPL. 2):14-27.

53. Shearer A, Bagust A, Sanderson D, Heller S, Roberts S. Cost-effectiveness of flexible intensive insulin management to enable dietary freedom in people with Type 1 diabetes in the UK. Diabetic Medicine 2004; 21(5):460-467.

54. Mueller E, Maxion-Bergemann S, Gultyaev D, Walzer S, Freemantle N, Mathieu C et al. Development and validation of the economic assessment of glycemic control and long-term effects of diabetes (EAGLE) model. Diabetes Technology and Therapeutics 2006; 8(2):219-236.

55. Grima DT, Thompson MF, Sauriol L. Modelling cost effectiveness of insulin glargine for the treatment of type 1 and 2 diabetes in Canada. PharmacoEconomics 2007; 25(3):253-266.

56. Airoldi M, Bevan G, Morton A, Oliveira M, Smith J. Requisite models for strategic commissioning: The example of type 1 diabetes. Health Care Management Science 2008; 11(2):89-110.

57. Beckwith J, Nyman JA, Flanagan B, Schrover R, Schuurman HJ. A health economic analysis of clinical islet transplantation. Clinical Transplantation 2012; 26(1):23-33.

58. Beckwith J, Nyman JA, Flanagan B, Schrover R, Schuurman HJ. A health-economic analysis of porcine islet xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation 2010; 17(3):233-242.

59. Schuurman H, Beckwith J, Nyman JA, Flanagan B, Schrover R. A health-economic analysis of clinical islet transplantation. Transplantation 2010; 90:318.

60. Kruger J, Brennan A, Thokala P, Basarir H, Jacques R, Elliott J et al. The cost-effectiveness of the Dose Adjustment for Normal Eating (DAFNE) structured education programme: An update using the Sheffield Type 1 Diabetes Policy Model. Diabetic Medicine 2013; 30(10):1236-1244.

61. Thokala P, Kruger J, Brennan A, Basarir H, Duenas A, Pandor A et al. Assessing the cost-effectiveness of Type 1 diabetes interventions: The Sheffield Type 1 Diabetes Policy Model. Diabetic Medicine 2014; 31(4):477-486.

62. Basarir H, Pollard D, Brennan A, Elliott J, Heller S, Campbell MJ. The potential value of ongoing support in type-1 diabetes mellitus with dafneplus: Exploratory pre-trial cost-effectiveness analysis on proposed trial end-point target for 12-month hba1c improvement. Value in Health 2014; 17(7):A350.

63. Kruger J, Brennan A, Thokala P, Basarir H, Jacques R, Elliott J. The cost-effectiveness of five week vs one week DAFNE structured education in Type 1 diabetes: A preliminary evaluation using the Sheffield Type 1 diabetes policy model. Diabetic Medicine 2013; 30:131.

64. Thokala P. Cost-effectiveness modelling of type-1 diabetes. Value in Health 2012; 15(7):A664.

65. Thokala P, Kruger J, Brennan A. Cost-effectiveness modelling of type-1 diabetes. Value in Health 2012; 15(4):A181-A182.

66. Kruger J, Brennan A, Thokala P, Cooke D, Bond R, Heller S. Accounting for psychological determinants of treatment response in health economic simulation models of behavioural interventions: A case study in type 1 diabetes. Value in Health 2012; 15(4):A191.

67. Kruger J, Brennan A, Thokala P, Heller S. The cost-effectiveness of providing DAFNE to subgroups of predicted responders. Diabetic Medicine 2012; 29:111.

68. Kruger J, Brennan A, Thokala P, Heller S. The cost-effectiveness of providing a DAFNE follow-up intervention to predicted nonresponders. Diabetic Medicine 2012; 29:111-112.

69. Kruger J, Brennan A, Thokala P, Fitzgerald P, Heller S. Incorporating psychosocial characteristics in cost-effectiveness modelling of Type 1 diabetes. Diabetic Medicine 2011; 28:117.

70. Kruger J, Brennan A, Thokala P, Basarir H, Heller S. The cost-effectiveness of dose adjustment for normal eating (DAFNE) structured education in Type 1 diabetes:Anupdate using the Sheffield Type 1 diabetes policy model. Diabetic Medicine 2013; 30:133-134.