Cargando…
Reproducible research practices, openness and transparency in health economic evaluations: study protocol for a cross-sectional comparative analysis
INTRODUCTION: There has been a growing awareness of the need for rigorously and transparent reported health research, to ensure the reproducibility of studies by future researchers. Health economic evaluations, the comparative analysis of alternative interventions in terms of their costs and consequ...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7045222/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32060160 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034463 |
_version_ | 1783501736653094912 |
---|---|
author | Catalá-López, Ferrán Caulley, Lisa Ridao, Manuel Hutton, Brian Husereau, Don Drummond, Michael F Alonso-Arroyo, Adolfo Pardo-Fernández, Manuel Bernal-Delgado, Enrique Meneu, Ricard Tabarés-Seisdedos, Rafael Repullo, José Ramón Moher, David |
author_facet | Catalá-López, Ferrán Caulley, Lisa Ridao, Manuel Hutton, Brian Husereau, Don Drummond, Michael F Alonso-Arroyo, Adolfo Pardo-Fernández, Manuel Bernal-Delgado, Enrique Meneu, Ricard Tabarés-Seisdedos, Rafael Repullo, José Ramón Moher, David |
author_sort | Catalá-López, Ferrán |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: There has been a growing awareness of the need for rigorously and transparent reported health research, to ensure the reproducibility of studies by future researchers. Health economic evaluations, the comparative analysis of alternative interventions in terms of their costs and consequences, have been promoted as an important tool to inform decision-making. The objective of this study will be to investigate the extent to which articles of economic evaluations of healthcare interventions indexed in MEDLINE incorporate research practices that promote transparency, openness and reproducibility. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is the study protocol for a cross-sectional comparative analysis. We registered the study protocol within the Open Science Framework (osf.io/gzaxr). We will evaluate a random sample of 600 cost-effectiveness analysis publications, a specific form of health economic evaluations, indexed in MEDLINE during 2012 (n=200), 2019 (n=200) and 2022 (n=200). We will include published papers written in English reporting an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in terms of costs per life years gained, quality-adjusted life years and/or disability-adjusted life years. Screening and selection of articles will be conducted by at least two researchers. Reproducible research practices, openness and transparency in each article will be extracted using a standardised data extraction form by multiple researchers, with a 33% random sample (n=200) extracted in duplicate. Information on general, methodological and reproducibility items will be reported, stratified by year, citation of the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement and journal. Risk ratios with 95% CIs will be calculated to represent changes in reporting between 2012–2019 and 2019–2022. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Due to the nature of the proposed study, no ethical approval will be required. All data will be deposited in a cross-disciplinary public repository. It is anticipated the study findings could be relevant to a variety of audiences. Study findings will be disseminated at scientific conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7045222 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70452222020-03-09 Reproducible research practices, openness and transparency in health economic evaluations: study protocol for a cross-sectional comparative analysis Catalá-López, Ferrán Caulley, Lisa Ridao, Manuel Hutton, Brian Husereau, Don Drummond, Michael F Alonso-Arroyo, Adolfo Pardo-Fernández, Manuel Bernal-Delgado, Enrique Meneu, Ricard Tabarés-Seisdedos, Rafael Repullo, José Ramón Moher, David BMJ Open Health Economics INTRODUCTION: There has been a growing awareness of the need for rigorously and transparent reported health research, to ensure the reproducibility of studies by future researchers. Health economic evaluations, the comparative analysis of alternative interventions in terms of their costs and consequences, have been promoted as an important tool to inform decision-making. The objective of this study will be to investigate the extent to which articles of economic evaluations of healthcare interventions indexed in MEDLINE incorporate research practices that promote transparency, openness and reproducibility. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is the study protocol for a cross-sectional comparative analysis. We registered the study protocol within the Open Science Framework (osf.io/gzaxr). We will evaluate a random sample of 600 cost-effectiveness analysis publications, a specific form of health economic evaluations, indexed in MEDLINE during 2012 (n=200), 2019 (n=200) and 2022 (n=200). We will include published papers written in English reporting an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in terms of costs per life years gained, quality-adjusted life years and/or disability-adjusted life years. Screening and selection of articles will be conducted by at least two researchers. Reproducible research practices, openness and transparency in each article will be extracted using a standardised data extraction form by multiple researchers, with a 33% random sample (n=200) extracted in duplicate. Information on general, methodological and reproducibility items will be reported, stratified by year, citation of the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement and journal. Risk ratios with 95% CIs will be calculated to represent changes in reporting between 2012–2019 and 2019–2022. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Due to the nature of the proposed study, no ethical approval will be required. All data will be deposited in a cross-disciplinary public repository. It is anticipated the study findings could be relevant to a variety of audiences. Study findings will be disseminated at scientific conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-02-13 /pmc/articles/PMC7045222/ /pubmed/32060160 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034463 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/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, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Health Economics Catalá-López, Ferrán Caulley, Lisa Ridao, Manuel Hutton, Brian Husereau, Don Drummond, Michael F Alonso-Arroyo, Adolfo Pardo-Fernández, Manuel Bernal-Delgado, Enrique Meneu, Ricard Tabarés-Seisdedos, Rafael Repullo, José Ramón Moher, David Reproducible research practices, openness and transparency in health economic evaluations: study protocol for a cross-sectional comparative analysis |
title | Reproducible research practices, openness and transparency in health economic evaluations: study protocol for a cross-sectional comparative analysis |
title_full | Reproducible research practices, openness and transparency in health economic evaluations: study protocol for a cross-sectional comparative analysis |
title_fullStr | Reproducible research practices, openness and transparency in health economic evaluations: study protocol for a cross-sectional comparative analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Reproducible research practices, openness and transparency in health economic evaluations: study protocol for a cross-sectional comparative analysis |
title_short | Reproducible research practices, openness and transparency in health economic evaluations: study protocol for a cross-sectional comparative analysis |
title_sort | reproducible research practices, openness and transparency in health economic evaluations: study protocol for a cross-sectional comparative analysis |
topic | Health Economics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7045222/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32060160 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034463 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT catalalopezferran reproducibleresearchpracticesopennessandtransparencyinhealtheconomicevaluationsstudyprotocolforacrosssectionalcomparativeanalysis AT caulleylisa reproducibleresearchpracticesopennessandtransparencyinhealtheconomicevaluationsstudyprotocolforacrosssectionalcomparativeanalysis AT ridaomanuel reproducibleresearchpracticesopennessandtransparencyinhealtheconomicevaluationsstudyprotocolforacrosssectionalcomparativeanalysis AT huttonbrian reproducibleresearchpracticesopennessandtransparencyinhealtheconomicevaluationsstudyprotocolforacrosssectionalcomparativeanalysis AT husereaudon reproducibleresearchpracticesopennessandtransparencyinhealtheconomicevaluationsstudyprotocolforacrosssectionalcomparativeanalysis AT drummondmichaelf reproducibleresearchpracticesopennessandtransparencyinhealtheconomicevaluationsstudyprotocolforacrosssectionalcomparativeanalysis AT alonsoarroyoadolfo reproducibleresearchpracticesopennessandtransparencyinhealtheconomicevaluationsstudyprotocolforacrosssectionalcomparativeanalysis AT pardofernandezmanuel reproducibleresearchpracticesopennessandtransparencyinhealtheconomicevaluationsstudyprotocolforacrosssectionalcomparativeanalysis AT bernaldelgadoenrique reproducibleresearchpracticesopennessandtransparencyinhealtheconomicevaluationsstudyprotocolforacrosssectionalcomparativeanalysis AT meneuricard reproducibleresearchpracticesopennessandtransparencyinhealtheconomicevaluationsstudyprotocolforacrosssectionalcomparativeanalysis AT tabaresseisdedosrafael reproducibleresearchpracticesopennessandtransparencyinhealtheconomicevaluationsstudyprotocolforacrosssectionalcomparativeanalysis AT repullojoseramon reproducibleresearchpracticesopennessandtransparencyinhealtheconomicevaluationsstudyprotocolforacrosssectionalcomparativeanalysis AT moherdavid reproducibleresearchpracticesopennessandtransparencyinhealtheconomicevaluationsstudyprotocolforacrosssectionalcomparativeanalysis |