Methods for Systematic Reviews of Health Economic Evaluations

Tim Mathes · Maren Walgenbach · Sunya‐Lee Antoine · Dawid Pieper · Michaela Eikermann

30 citations0/0 files storedMedical Decision Making

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Meta-analysis and systematic reviews Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life Delphi Technique in Research

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The quality of systematic reviews of health economic evaluations (SR-HE) is often limited because of methodological shortcomings. One reason for this poor quality is that there are no established standards for the preparation of SR-HE. The objective of this study is to compare existing methods and suggest best practices for the preparation of SR-HE. METHODS: To identify the relevant methodological literature on SR-HE, a systematic literature search was performed in Embase, Medline, the National Health System Economic Evaluation Database, the Health Technology Assessment Database, and the Cochrane methodology register, and webpages of international health technology assessment agencies were searched. The study selection was performed independently by 2 reviewers. Data were extracted by one reviewer and verified by a second reviewer. On the basis of the overlaps in the recommendations for the methods of SR-HE in the included papers, suggestions for best practices for the preparation of SR-HE were developed. RESULTS: Nineteen relevant publications were identified. The recommendations within them often differed. However, for most process steps there was some overlap between recommendations for the methods of preparation. The overlaps were taken as basis on which to develop suggestions for the following process steps of preparation: defining the research question, developing eligibility criteria, conducting a literature search, selecting studies, assessing the methodological study quality, assessing transferability, and synthesizing data. DISCUSSION: The differences in the proposed recommendations are not always explainable by the focus on certain evaluation types, target audiences, or integration in the decision process. Currently, there seem to be no standard methods for the preparation of SR-HE. The suggestions presented here can contribute to the harmonization of methods for the preparation of SR-HE.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 30 citations exist upstream.

References

2009Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement 2005Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes 1996Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ 2005Criteria list for assessment of methodological quality of economic evaluations: Consensus on Health Economic Criteria 2004Review of guidelines for good practice in decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment 2000Reviews of evidence regarding interventions to improve vaccination coverage in children, adolescents, and adults11The names and affiliations of the Task Force members are listed on page v of this supplement and at http://www.thecommunityguide.org22Some of this material was published previously in: Shefer A, Briss P, Rodewald L, et al. Improving immunization coverage rates: an evidence-based review of the literature. Epidemiol Rev 1999;20:96–142.2004Generalisability in economic evaluation studies in healthcare: a review and case studies 1998Confidence intervals or surfaces? Uncertainty on the cost-effectiveness plane

Cited by

2021Critical Appraisal of Systematic Reviews With Costs and Cost-Effectiveness Outcomes: An ISPOR Good Practices Task Force Report 2019Systematic reviews of health economic evaluations: A structured analysis of characteristics and methods applied

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.