Cargando…

Protocol for a systematic review of preference-based instruments for measuring care-related outcomes and their suitability for the palliative care setting

INTRODUCTION: Despite informal caregivers' integral role in supporting people affected by disease or disability, economic evaluations often ignore the costs and benefits experienced by this group, especially in the palliative setting. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify prefere...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McCaffrey, Nikki, Al-Janabi, Hareth, Currow, David, Hoefman, Renske, Ratcliffe, Julie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5030581/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27619829
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012181
_version_ 1782454703715516416
author McCaffrey, Nikki
Al-Janabi, Hareth
Currow, David
Hoefman, Renske
Ratcliffe, Julie
author_facet McCaffrey, Nikki
Al-Janabi, Hareth
Currow, David
Hoefman, Renske
Ratcliffe, Julie
author_sort McCaffrey, Nikki
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Despite informal caregivers' integral role in supporting people affected by disease or disability, economic evaluations often ignore the costs and benefits experienced by this group, especially in the palliative setting. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify preference-based instruments for measuring care-related outcomes and provide guidance on the selection of instrument in palliative care economic evaluations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A comprehensive search of the literature will be conducted from database inception (ASSIA; CINAHL; Cochrane library including DARE, NHS EED, HTA; Econlit; Embase; PsychINFO; PubMed). Published peer-reviewed, English-language articles reporting preference-based instruments for measuring care-related outcomes in any clinical area will be included. One researcher will complete the searches and screen the results for potentially eligible studies. A randomly selected subset of 10% citations will be independently screened by two researchers. Any disagreement will be resolved by consensus among the research team. Subsequently, a supplementary search will identify studies detailing the development, valuation, validation and application of the identified instruments. The degree of suitability of the instruments for palliative economic evaluations will be assessed using criteria in the International Society for Quality of Life Research minimum standards for patient-reported outcome measures, the checklist for reporting valuation studies of multiattribute utility-based instruments and information on the development of the instrument in the palliative setting. A narrative summary of the included studies and instruments will be provided; similarities and differences will be described and possible reasons for variations explored. Recommendations for practice on selection of instruments in palliative care economic analyses will be provided. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This is a planned systematic review of published literature. Therefore, ethics approval to conduct this research is not required. Findings will be presented at leading palliative care and health economic conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42016034188.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5030581
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50305812016-10-04 Protocol for a systematic review of preference-based instruments for measuring care-related outcomes and their suitability for the palliative care setting McCaffrey, Nikki Al-Janabi, Hareth Currow, David Hoefman, Renske Ratcliffe, Julie BMJ Open Health Economics INTRODUCTION: Despite informal caregivers' integral role in supporting people affected by disease or disability, economic evaluations often ignore the costs and benefits experienced by this group, especially in the palliative setting. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify preference-based instruments for measuring care-related outcomes and provide guidance on the selection of instrument in palliative care economic evaluations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A comprehensive search of the literature will be conducted from database inception (ASSIA; CINAHL; Cochrane library including DARE, NHS EED, HTA; Econlit; Embase; PsychINFO; PubMed). Published peer-reviewed, English-language articles reporting preference-based instruments for measuring care-related outcomes in any clinical area will be included. One researcher will complete the searches and screen the results for potentially eligible studies. A randomly selected subset of 10% citations will be independently screened by two researchers. Any disagreement will be resolved by consensus among the research team. Subsequently, a supplementary search will identify studies detailing the development, valuation, validation and application of the identified instruments. The degree of suitability of the instruments for palliative economic evaluations will be assessed using criteria in the International Society for Quality of Life Research minimum standards for patient-reported outcome measures, the checklist for reporting valuation studies of multiattribute utility-based instruments and information on the development of the instrument in the palliative setting. A narrative summary of the included studies and instruments will be provided; similarities and differences will be described and possible reasons for variations explored. Recommendations for practice on selection of instruments in palliative care economic analyses will be provided. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This is a planned systematic review of published literature. Therefore, ethics approval to conduct this research is not required. Findings will be presented at leading palliative care and health economic conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42016034188. BMJ Publishing Group 2016-09-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5030581/ /pubmed/27619829 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012181 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Health Economics
McCaffrey, Nikki
Al-Janabi, Hareth
Currow, David
Hoefman, Renske
Ratcliffe, Julie
Protocol for a systematic review of preference-based instruments for measuring care-related outcomes and their suitability for the palliative care setting
title Protocol for a systematic review of preference-based instruments for measuring care-related outcomes and their suitability for the palliative care setting
title_full Protocol for a systematic review of preference-based instruments for measuring care-related outcomes and their suitability for the palliative care setting
title_fullStr Protocol for a systematic review of preference-based instruments for measuring care-related outcomes and their suitability for the palliative care setting
title_full_unstemmed Protocol for a systematic review of preference-based instruments for measuring care-related outcomes and their suitability for the palliative care setting
title_short Protocol for a systematic review of preference-based instruments for measuring care-related outcomes and their suitability for the palliative care setting
title_sort protocol for a systematic review of preference-based instruments for measuring care-related outcomes and their suitability for the palliative care setting
topic Health Economics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5030581/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27619829
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012181
work_keys_str_mv AT mccaffreynikki protocolforasystematicreviewofpreferencebasedinstrumentsformeasuringcarerelatedoutcomesandtheirsuitabilityforthepalliativecaresetting
AT aljanabihareth protocolforasystematicreviewofpreferencebasedinstrumentsformeasuringcarerelatedoutcomesandtheirsuitabilityforthepalliativecaresetting
AT currowdavid protocolforasystematicreviewofpreferencebasedinstrumentsformeasuringcarerelatedoutcomesandtheirsuitabilityforthepalliativecaresetting
AT hoefmanrenske protocolforasystematicreviewofpreferencebasedinstrumentsformeasuringcarerelatedoutcomesandtheirsuitabilityforthepalliativecaresetting
AT ratcliffejulie protocolforasystematicreviewofpreferencebasedinstrumentsformeasuringcarerelatedoutcomesandtheirsuitabilityforthepalliativecaresetting