Instruments designed for quality assessment of pharmaceutical economic evaluations: an overview_Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Authors：

ZHANG Shiyu ^# ,  MA Aixia ^# , LI Hongchao , GUAN Xin

School of International Pharmaceutical Business, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing, 211198, P.R.China;

Corresponding author：

MA Aixia, Email: aixiama73@126.com

Keywords：

Pharmaceutical economic; Quality assessment instrument; Reliability; Validity

DOI：

10.7507/1672-2531.201803039

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Objectives To compare and analyze existing pharmaceutical economic evaluations quality assessment instruments, and to provide suggestions on how to choose the most appropriate instrument.Methods PubMed, EMbase, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP databases were electronically searched to collect studies on existing pharmaceutical economic evaluations quality assessment instruments from inception to December, 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and analyzed studies in terms of items, design methods, scopes and characteristics.Results Twelve original checklists with good reliability and validity were found. The first quality assessment method was designed in 1987 and the latest one was published in 2013. The number of checklist items ranged from 11 to 61.Conclusion There is no consolidated method for assessing the quality of pharmaceutical economics evaluations. Evaluators can choose appropriate evaluation tools according to the purpose, type and operability of evaluation.

Citation： ZHANG Shiyu, MA Aixia, LI Hongchao, GUAN Xin. Instruments designed for quality assessment of pharmaceutical economic evaluations: an overview. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2019, 19(7): 844-850. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.201803039 Copy

1.	雷蕾, 胡明, 张铮. 2010年国内药物经济学评价文献的系统评估和质量评价. 中国药房, 2013, (26): 2401-2404.
2.	伍红艳, 田彩林. 2009-2013年国内药物经济学评价类文献之质量分析. 中国药房, 2015, (11): 1441-1445.
3.	Drummond MF. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
4.	Adams ME, McCall NT, Gray DT, et al. Economic analysis in randomized control trials. Med Care, 1992, 30(3): 231-243.
5.	Gerard K. Cost-utility in practice: a policy maker's guide to the state of the art. Health Policy, 1992, 21(3): 249-279.
6.	Sacristán JA, Soto J, Galende I. Evaluation of pharmacoeconomic studies: utilization of a checklist. Ann Pharmacother, 1993, 27(9): 1126-1133.
7.	Clemens K, Townsend R, Luscombe F, et al. Methodological and conduct principles for pharmacoeconomic research. Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. Pharmacoeconomics, 1995, 8(2): 169-174.
8.	Siegel JE, Weinstein MC, Russell LB, et al. Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA, 1996, 276(16): 1339-1341.
9.	Russell LB, Gold MR, Siegel JE, et al. The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in health and medicine. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA, 1996, 276(14): 1172-1177.
10.	Drummond MF, Jefferson TO. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. The BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party. BMJ, 1996, 313(7052): 275-283.
11.	Chiou CF, Hay JW, Wallace JF, et al. Development and validation of a grading system for the quality of cost-effectiveness studies. Med Care, 2003, 41(1): 32-44.
12.	Evers S, Goossens M, de Vet H, et al. Criteria list for assessment of methodological quality of economic evaluations: Consensus on Health Economic Criteria. Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 2005, 21(2): 240-245.
13.	Philips Z, Bojke L, Sculpher M, et al. Good practice guidelines for decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment: a review and consolidation of quality assessment. Pharmacoeconomics, 2006, 24(4): 355-371.
14.	Grutters JP, Seferina SC, Tjan-Heijnen VC, et al. Bridging trial and decision: a checklist to frame health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions. Value Health, 2011, 14(5): 777-784.
15.	Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS)-explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force. Value Health, 2013, 16(2): 231-250.
16.	Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement. Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 2013, 29(2): 117-122.
17.	Gerard K, Seymour J, Smoker I. A tool to improve quality of reporting published economic analyses. Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 2000, 16(1): 100-110.
18.	Gerkens S, Crott R, Cleemput I, et al. Comparison of three instruments assessing the quality of economic evaluations: a practical exercise on economic evaluations of the surgical treatment of obesity. Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 2008, 24(3): 318-325.
19.	Langer A. A framework for assessing Health Economic Evaluation (HEE) quality appraisal instruments. BMC Health Serv Res, 2012, 12: 253.
20.	Walker DG, Wilson RF, Sharma R, et al. AHRQ methods for effective health care. Best practices for conducting economic evaluations in health care: a systematic review of quality assessment tools. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), 2012.
21.	《中国药物经济学评价指南》课题组, 刘国恩, 胡善联, 等. 中国药物经济学评价指南(2011版). 中国药物经济学, 2011, (3): 6-48.
22.	吴久鸿, 赵绯丽. 如何评判药物经济学研究的质量. 中国卫生经济, 2015, 34(8): 68-70.
23.	伍红艳, 田彩林. 基于文献计量分析看国内药物经济学评价研究的现状及发展. 中国药房, 2015, (17): 2305-2307.
24.	王小艺, 王英, 冯晓远, 等. 我国药物经济学研究质量评价指标体系的初步遴选. 中国药物经济学, 2016, 11(9): 17-20.

1. 雷蕾, 胡明, 张铮. 2010年国内药物经济学评价文献的系统评估和质量评价. 中国药房, 2013, (26): 2401-2404.
2. 伍红艳, 田彩林. 2009-2013年国内药物经济学评价类文献之质量分析. 中国药房, 2015, (11): 1441-1445.
3. Drummond MF. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
4. Adams ME, McCall NT, Gray DT, et al. Economic analysis in randomized control trials. Med Care, 1992, 30(3): 231-243.
5. Gerard K. Cost-utility in practice: a policy maker's guide to the state of the art. Health Policy, 1992, 21(3): 249-279.
6. Sacristán JA, Soto J, Galende I. Evaluation of pharmacoeconomic studies: utilization of a checklist. Ann Pharmacother, 1993, 27(9): 1126-1133.
7. Clemens K, Townsend R, Luscombe F, et al. Methodological and conduct principles for pharmacoeconomic research. Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. Pharmacoeconomics, 1995, 8(2): 169-174.
8. Siegel JE, Weinstein MC, Russell LB, et al. Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA, 1996, 276(16): 1339-1341.
9. Russell LB, Gold MR, Siegel JE, et al. The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in health and medicine. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA, 1996, 276(14): 1172-1177.
10. Drummond MF, Jefferson TO. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. The BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party. BMJ, 1996, 313(7052): 275-283.
11. Chiou CF, Hay JW, Wallace JF, et al. Development and validation of a grading system for the quality of cost-effectiveness studies. Med Care, 2003, 41(1): 32-44.
12. Evers S, Goossens M, de Vet H, et al. Criteria list for assessment of methodological quality of economic evaluations: Consensus on Health Economic Criteria. Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 2005, 21(2): 240-245.
13. Philips Z, Bojke L, Sculpher M, et al. Good practice guidelines for decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment: a review and consolidation of quality assessment. Pharmacoeconomics, 2006, 24(4): 355-371.
14. Grutters JP, Seferina SC, Tjan-Heijnen VC, et al. Bridging trial and decision: a checklist to frame health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions. Value Health, 2011, 14(5): 777-784.
15. Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS)-explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force. Value Health, 2013, 16(2): 231-250.
16. Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement. Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 2013, 29(2): 117-122.
17. Gerard K, Seymour J, Smoker I. A tool to improve quality of reporting published economic analyses. Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 2000, 16(1): 100-110.
18. Gerkens S, Crott R, Cleemput I, et al. Comparison of three instruments assessing the quality of economic evaluations: a practical exercise on economic evaluations of the surgical treatment of obesity. Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 2008, 24(3): 318-325.
19. Langer A. A framework for assessing Health Economic Evaluation (HEE) quality appraisal instruments. BMC Health Serv Res, 2012, 12: 253.
20. Walker DG, Wilson RF, Sharma R, et al. AHRQ methods for effective health care. Best practices for conducting economic evaluations in health care: a systematic review of quality assessment tools. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), 2012.
21. 《中国药物经济学评价指南》课题组, 刘国恩, 胡善联, 等. 中国药物经济学评价指南(2011版). 中国药物经济学, 2011, (3): 6-48.
22. 吴久鸿, 赵绯丽. 如何评判药物经济学研究的质量. 中国卫生经济, 2015, 34(8): 68-70.
23. 伍红艳, 田彩林. 基于文献计量分析看国内药物经济学评价研究的现状及发展. 中国药房, 2015, (17): 2305-2307.
24. 王小艺, 王英, 冯晓远, 等. 我国药物经济学研究质量评价指标体系的初步遴选. 中国药物经济学, 2016, 11(9): 17-20.

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Instruments designed for quality assessment of pharmaceutical economic evaluations: an overview

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content