Cargando…

Assessing transferability in systematic reviews of health economic evaluations – a review of methodological guidance

OBJECTIVE: For assessing cost-effectiveness, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) organisations may use primary economic evaluations (P-HEs) or Systematic Reviews of Health Economic evaluations (SR-HEs). A prerequisite for meaningful results of SR-HEs is that the results from existing P-HEs are transf...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Weise, Alina, Büchter, Roland Brian, Pieper, Dawid, Mathes, Tim
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8858549/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35184733
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01536-6
_version_ 1784654265025822720
author Weise, Alina
Büchter, Roland Brian
Pieper, Dawid
Mathes, Tim
author_facet Weise, Alina
Büchter, Roland Brian
Pieper, Dawid
Mathes, Tim
author_sort Weise, Alina
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: For assessing cost-effectiveness, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) organisations may use primary economic evaluations (P-HEs) or Systematic Reviews of Health Economic evaluations (SR-HEs). A prerequisite for meaningful results of SR-HEs is that the results from existing P-HEs are transferable to the decision context (e.g, HTA jurisdiction). A particularly pertinent issue is the high variability of costs and resource needs across jurisdictions. Our objective was to review the methods documents of HTA organisations and compare their recommendations on considering transferability in SR-HE. METHODS: We systematically hand searched the webpages of 158 HTA organisations for relevant methods documents from 8th January to 31st March 2019. Two independent reviewers performed searches and selected documents according to pre-defined criteria. One reviewer extracted data in standardised and piloted tables and a second reviewer checked them for accuracy. We synthesised data using tabulations and in a narrative way. RESULTS: We identified 155 potentially relevant documents from 63 HTA organisations. Of these, 7 were included in the synthesis. The included organisations have different aims when preparing a SR-HE (e.g. to determine the need for conducting their own P-HE). The recommendations vary regarding the underlying terminology (e.g. transferability/generalisability), the assessment approaches (e.g. structure), the assessment criteria and the integration in the review process. CONCLUSION: Only few HTA organisations address the assessment of transferability in their methodological recommendations for SR-HEs. Transferability considerations are related to different purposes. The assessment concepts and criteria are heterogeneous. Developing standards to consider transferability in SR-HEs is desirable. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01536-6.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8858549
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88585492022-02-23 Assessing transferability in systematic reviews of health economic evaluations – a review of methodological guidance Weise, Alina Büchter, Roland Brian Pieper, Dawid Mathes, Tim BMC Med Res Methodol Research OBJECTIVE: For assessing cost-effectiveness, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) organisations may use primary economic evaluations (P-HEs) or Systematic Reviews of Health Economic evaluations (SR-HEs). A prerequisite for meaningful results of SR-HEs is that the results from existing P-HEs are transferable to the decision context (e.g, HTA jurisdiction). A particularly pertinent issue is the high variability of costs and resource needs across jurisdictions. Our objective was to review the methods documents of HTA organisations and compare their recommendations on considering transferability in SR-HE. METHODS: We systematically hand searched the webpages of 158 HTA organisations for relevant methods documents from 8th January to 31st March 2019. Two independent reviewers performed searches and selected documents according to pre-defined criteria. One reviewer extracted data in standardised and piloted tables and a second reviewer checked them for accuracy. We synthesised data using tabulations and in a narrative way. RESULTS: We identified 155 potentially relevant documents from 63 HTA organisations. Of these, 7 were included in the synthesis. The included organisations have different aims when preparing a SR-HE (e.g. to determine the need for conducting their own P-HE). The recommendations vary regarding the underlying terminology (e.g. transferability/generalisability), the assessment approaches (e.g. structure), the assessment criteria and the integration in the review process. CONCLUSION: Only few HTA organisations address the assessment of transferability in their methodological recommendations for SR-HEs. Transferability considerations are related to different purposes. The assessment concepts and criteria are heterogeneous. Developing standards to consider transferability in SR-HEs is desirable. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01536-6. BioMed Central 2022-02-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8858549/ /pubmed/35184733 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01536-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Weise, Alina
Büchter, Roland Brian
Pieper, Dawid
Mathes, Tim
Assessing transferability in systematic reviews of health economic evaluations – a review of methodological guidance
title Assessing transferability in systematic reviews of health economic evaluations – a review of methodological guidance
title_full Assessing transferability in systematic reviews of health economic evaluations – a review of methodological guidance
title_fullStr Assessing transferability in systematic reviews of health economic evaluations – a review of methodological guidance
title_full_unstemmed Assessing transferability in systematic reviews of health economic evaluations – a review of methodological guidance
title_short Assessing transferability in systematic reviews of health economic evaluations – a review of methodological guidance
title_sort assessing transferability in systematic reviews of health economic evaluations – a review of methodological guidance
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8858549/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35184733
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01536-6
work_keys_str_mv AT weisealina assessingtransferabilityinsystematicreviewsofhealtheconomicevaluationsareviewofmethodologicalguidance
AT buchterrolandbrian assessingtransferabilityinsystematicreviewsofhealtheconomicevaluationsareviewofmethodologicalguidance
AT pieperdawid assessingtransferabilityinsystematicreviewsofhealtheconomicevaluationsareviewofmethodologicalguidance
AT mathestim assessingtransferabilityinsystematicreviewsofhealtheconomicevaluationsareviewofmethodologicalguidance