Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) Statement: Updated Reporting Guidance for Health Economic Evaluations

被引:474
作者
Husereau, Don [1 ,2 ]
Drummond, Michael [3 ]
Augustovski, Federico [4 ,5 ]
De Bekker-Grob, Esther [10 ]
Briggs, Andrew H. [6 ]
Carswell, Chris [7 ]
Caulley, Lisa [8 ]
Chaiyakunapruk, Nathorn [9 ]
Greenberg, Dan [11 ]
Loder, Elizabeth [12 ]
Mauskopf, Josephine [13 ]
Mullins, C. Daniel [14 ]
Petrou, Stavros [15 ]
Pwu, Raoh-Fang [16 ]
Staniszewska, Sophie [17 ]
机构
[1] Univ Ottawa, Sch Epidemiol & Publ Hlth, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[2] Inst Hlth Econ, Edmonton, AB, Canada
[3] Univ York, Ctr Hlth Econ, York, N Yorkshire, England
[4] Inst Clin Effectiveness & Hlth Policy, Hlth Technol Assessment & Hlth Econ, Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
[5] Natl Sci & Tech Res Council Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
[6] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Dept Publ Hlth & Policy, London, England
[7] Springer Nat, Auckland, New Zealand
[8] Ottawa Hosp, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[9] Univ Utah, Dept Pharmacotherapy, Salt Lake City, UT USA
[10] Erasmus Univ, Sch Hlth Policy & Management, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[11] Ben Gurion Univ Negev, Dept Hlth Syst Management, Beer Sheva, Israel
[12] Brigham & Womens Hosp, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[13] RTI Int, Res Triangle Pk, NC USA
[14] Univ Maryland, Pharmaceut Hlth Serv Res Dept, Baltimore, MD USA
[15] Univ Oxford, Nuffield Dept Primary Care Hlth Sci, Oxford, Oxon, England
[16] Taiwan Minist Hlth & Welf, Taipei, Taiwan
[17] Univ Warwick, Warwick Med Sch, Coventry, W Midlands, England
关键词
COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; CLINICAL-TRIALS; GUIDELINES; RECOMMENDATIONS; IMPACT; DESIGN;
D O I
10.1016/j.jval.2021.11.1351
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Health economic evaluations are comparative analyses of alternative courses of action in terms of their costs and consequences. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement, published in 2013, was created to ensure health economic evaluations are identifiable, interpretable, and useful for decision making. It was intended as guidance to help authors report accurately which health interventions were being compared and in what context, how the evaluation was undertaken, what the findings were, and other details that may aid readers and reviewers in interpretation and use of the study. The new CHEERS 2022 statement replaces previous CHEERS reporting guidance. It reflects the need for guidance that can be more easily applied to all types of health economic evaluation, new methods and developments in the field, as well as the increased role of stakeholder involvement including patients and the public. It is also broadly applicable to any form of intervention intended to improve the health of individuals or the population, whether simple or complex, and without regard to context (such as health care, public health, education, social care, etc). This summary article presents the new CHEERS 2022 28-item checklist and recommendations for each item. The CHEERS 2022 statement is primarily intended for researchers reporting economic evaluations for peer reviewed journals as well as the peer reviewers and editors assessing them for publication. However, we anticipate familiarity with reporting requirements will be useful for analysts when planning studies. It may also be useful for health technology assessment bodies seeking guidance on reporting, as there is an increasing emphasis on transparency in decision making.
引用
收藏
页码:3 / 9
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
[1]   A history of the evolution of guidelines for reporting medical research: the long road to the EQUATOR Network [J].
Altman, Douglas G. ;
Simera, Iveta .
JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF MEDICINE, 2016, 109 (02) :67-77
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2009, BMJ, DOI DOI 10.1371/JOURNAL.PMED.1000097
[3]   Principles for deliberative processes in health technology assessment [J].
Bond, Kenneth ;
Stiffell, Rebecca ;
Ollendorf, Daniel A. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2020, 36 (04) :445-452
[4]  
CADTH.ca, 2015, GUID EC EV HLTH TECH
[5]   Reproducible research practices, openness and transparency in health economic evaluations: study protocol for a cross-sectional comparative analysis [J].
Catala-Lopez, Ferran ;
Caulley, Lisa ;
Ridao, Manuel ;
Hutton, Brian ;
Husereau, Don ;
Drummond, Michael F. ;
Alonso-Arroyo, Adolfo ;
Pardo-Fernandez, Manuel ;
Bernal-Delgado, Enrique ;
Meneu, Ricard ;
Tabares-Seisdedos, Rafael ;
Ramon Repullo, Jose ;
Moher, David .
BMJ OPEN, 2020, 10 (02)
[6]   Reporting guidelines of health research studies are frequently used inappropriately [J].
Caulley, Lisa ;
Catala-Lopez, Ferran ;
Whelan, Jonathan ;
Khoury, Michel ;
Ferraro, Jennifer ;
Cheng, Wei ;
Husereau, Don ;
Altman, Douglas G. ;
Moher, David .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2020, 122 :87-94
[7]   A Call for Open-Source Cost-Effectiveness Analysis [J].
Cohen, Joshua T. ;
Neumann, Peter J. ;
Wong, John B. .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2017, 167 (06) :432-+
[8]   Distributional Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Comes of Age [J].
Cookson, Richard ;
Griffin, Susan ;
Norheim, Ole F. ;
Culyer, Anthony J. ;
Chalkidou, Kalipso .
VALUE IN HEALTH, 2021, 24 (01) :118-120
[9]  
Cookson R, 2009, HEALTH ECON POLICY L, V4, P231, DOI 10.1017/S1744133109004903
[10]   Constrained Optimization Methods in Health Services Research-An Introduction: Report 1 of the ISPOR Optimization Methods Emerging Good Practices Task Force [J].
Crown, William ;
Buyukkaramikli, Nasuh ;
Thokala, Praveen ;
Morton, Alec ;
Sir, Mustafa Y. ;
Marshall, Deborah A. ;
Tosh, Jon ;
Padula, William V. ;
Ijzerman, Maarten J. ;
Wong, Peter K. ;
Pasupathy, Kalyan S. .
VALUE IN HEALTH, 2017, 20 (03) :310-319