Skip to main content
. 2023 May 2;10(1):e002221. doi: 10.1136/openhrt-2022-002221

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Estimated means for CMR, SPECT and NICE CG95 (2010) managed care (and differences vs CMR) for the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L Utilities. (A, B) Each panel presents the estimated least-squares means (with 95% CI) over time from repeated measures model for CMR, SPECT and NICE CG95 (2010)-based care (top section) and differences (with 95% CI) NICE–CMR and SPECT–CMR (lower section, shaded). Negative differences represent benefits for CMR versus comparator. Table ishow the number of patients included from the complete case analysis. CMR, Cardiac Magnetic Resonance based care; EQ-5D-3L[−5 L], Euroqol 5-dimension questionnaire, 3 [5] levels; NICE, NICE CG95 (2010) based management; SPECT, Single Photon Emission CT based care.CMR, cardiovascular magnetic resonance; EQ-5D-3L/5L, EuroQol 5-Dimension Questionnaire, 3/5 Levels; NICE, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; SPECT, single-photon emission CT.