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...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
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 |