Can economic evaluations be made more transferable?

被引:71
作者
Boulenger S. [1 ]
Nixon J. [2 ,3 ]
Drummond M. [2 ]
Ulmann P. [1 ]
Rice S. [2 ]
De Pouvourville G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Collège des Économistes de la Santé, Paris
[2] Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York
关键词
Economic evaluation; Generalisability; Transferability;
D O I
10.1007/s10198-005-0322-1
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Several commentators have identified the lack of generalisability and transferability of economic evaluation results. The aims of this study were: (a) to develop a checklist to assess the level of generalisability and transferability of economic evaluations; (b) to assess the generalisability and transferability of economic evaluations between the UK and France using the checklist; (c) to identify reasons for any lack of transferability and generalisability; (d) to assess how the transferability and generalisability of economic evaluations can be improved; and (e) to outline ways in which databases of economic evaluations and journals can assist in this area. The checklist was developed using previous work and the templates of the NHS EED and CODECS databases. A sub-checklist of essential items was then derived. Validation of the two checklists was undertaken with Health Economists participating in the EURONHEED project. Economic evaluations involving the UK and France were then located and assessed using the checklist. A summary score for each study was calculated based on the percentage of correctly reported (applicable) points, and the results in the empirical analysis compared to identify differences. The extended checklist includes 42 items, and the sub-checklist 16 items. Twenty-five economic evaluations met the inclusion criteria for the empirical analysis. In the extended checklist the mean score was 66.9±13.6%. The results for the sub-checklist were very similar. The analysis revealed that costing, assessments of generalisability by the author(s), assessment of data variability, discounting, study population, and the reporting of effectiveness are areas that need more attention. Differences in cost-effectiveness results are often accounted for by price or organisational differences. The developed checklists are useful in assessing the generalisability and transferability of economic evaluations. In order to improve the generalisability and transferability of economic evaluations authors need to be more explicit and detailed in describing and reporting their studies. If they are to provide added value to their users, international databases of economic evaluations should systematically assess the generalisability and transferability of studies. Further research is in progress on producing a weighted version of the checklist. © Springer Medizin Verlag 2005.
引用
收藏
页码:334 / 336
页数:2
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]  
Ament A., Et al., Cost-effectiveness of pneumococcal vaccination of older people: A study in 5 western European countries, Clin Infect Dis, 31, pp. 444-450, (2000)
[2]  
Arikian S., Et al., A multinational pharmacoeconomic analysis of oral therapies for onychomycosis, Br J Dermatol, 130, 43 SUPPL., pp. 35-44, (1994)
[3]  
Barbieri M., Et al., Variability of cost-effectiveness estimates for pharmaceuticals in western Europe: Lessons for inferring generalisability, Value Health, 8, pp. 10-23, (2005)
[4]  
Berger K., Et al., Cost-effectiveness analysis of paclitaxel and cisplatin versus cyclophosphamide and cisplatin as first-line therapy in advanced ovarian cancer. A European perspective, Eur J Cancer, 34, pp. 1894-1901, (1998)
[5]  
Borghi J., Guest J., Economic impact of using mirtazapine compared to amitriptyline and fluoxetine in the treatment of moderate and severe depression in the UK, Eur Psychiatry, 1, pp. 378-387, (2000)
[6]  
Boulenger S., Nixon J., Rice S., Ulmann P., Drummond M., Guidelines for completing the EURONHEED transferability checklist, EURONHEED Working Paper, (2004)
[7]  
Brown M., Et al., Cost-effectiveness of mirtazapine relative to fluoxetine in the treatment of moderate and severe depression in France, Eur J Psychiatry, 14, pp. 15-25, (2000)
[8]  
Chiou C.F., Et al., Development and validation of a grading system for the quality of cost-effectiveness studies, Med Care, 41, pp. 32-44, (2003)
[9]  
Reduced costs with bisoprolol treatment for heart failure. An economic analysis of the second Cardiac Insufficency Bisoprolol Study (CIBIS-II), Eur Heart J, 22, pp. 1021-1031, (2001)
[10]  
Methodological Guide on the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Interventions, (2003)