Comparison of results from selected previous studies
| Study | Haddix (2001) | Ginnely (2005) | Parmer (2006) | Liu (2012) | Diamond-Smith (2014) | Present study |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Distribution year | 1990 | 1997–1998 | 2002–2003 | NR | NR | 2006–2011 |
| Cost year | 1990 | 1999 | 2002 | 2011 | NR | 2013 |
| Location | Oklahoma City, USA | London, UK | 12 communities, USA | Model | Model* | Dallas, USA |
| Distribution type | Giveaway | Giveaway | Installation | Both | Installation | Installation |
| Alarms (n) | 10 100 | 20 050 | 95–1260 | NR | 260 | 24 127 |
| Houses (n) | 9291 | 19 950 | 56–604 | 706 | 10 000 | 8134 |
| Alarms per house (n)† | 1.1 | 1.0 | 1.7–2.1 | NR‡ | <0.1 | 2.5 |
| Total programme cost | $530 611 | £157 823 | $199 618–255 425 | $41 987 (g) to $105 053 (i) | $6845 | $1 419 502 |
| Average cost per alarm | ||||||
| As originally reported | $52.54 | £7.87 | $60.44–218.92 | $50 (g) to $240 (i)§ | $26.33¶ | $57.37 |
| As 2013 US$ | $84.05 | $16.85 | $76.00–275.28 | $51.75 (g) to $248.41 (i) | $26.33 | $59.18 |
| Injury observation period | 5 years | 23.9 months | NA | 20 years | 10 years | 5.2 years |
Inflated using price indices for US Gross Domestic Product25 and converted from foreign currency to US$ using http://www.xe.com (£1=$1.58 on 1 July 1999).
*Based in part on data (‘standard programme’ scenario data depicted in this table) from a programme in Baltimore, USA.
†Calculated.
‡Model assumed giveaway and installation programmes would reduce the number of houses without a functional smoke alarm by 30% and 80%, respectively.
§Cost year not reported in reference study, assumed approximately 2011 given the study's publication date.
¶Cost year not reported in reference study, assumed approximately 2013 given the study's publication date.
(g), giveaway; (i), installation; NA, not applicable; NR, not reported.