An overview of the characteristics and quality assessment criteria in systematic review of pharmacoeconomics

The systematic review of economic evaluations plays a critical role in making well-informed decisions about competing healthcare interventions. The quality of these systematic reviews varies due to the lack of internationally recognized methodological evaluation standards. Nine English and Chinese d...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:PloS one 2021-02, Vol.16 (2), p.e0246080
Main Authors: Min, Chen, Xue, Mi, Haotian, Fei, Jialian, Li, Lingli, Zhang
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Biology and Life Sciences
Birth defects
Check lists
Children
Collaboration
Conflicts of interest
Congenital defects
Cost analysis
Data analysis
Decision making
Disease
Diseases
Economic analysis
Economics
Editing
Education
Grey literature
Health policy
Hospitals
International organizations
Laboratories
Medical economics
Medical research
Medicine and Health Sciences
Medicine, Experimental
Methods
Pharmacoeconomics
Pharmacology
Pharmacy
Public health
Quality assessment
Quality control
Research and Analysis Methods
Reviews
Secondary data analysis
Social Sciences
Systematic review
Womens health
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The systematic review of economic evaluations plays a critical role in making well-informed decisions about competing healthcare interventions. The quality of these systematic reviews varies due to the lack of internationally recognized methodological evaluation standards. Nine English and Chinese databases including the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase (Ovid), NHS economic evaluation database (NHSEED) (Ovid), Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WangFang, VIP Chinese Science & Technology Periodicals (VIP) and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) were searched. Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data. The methodological quality of the literature was measured with modified AMSTAR. Data were narrative synthesized. 165 systematic reviews were included. The overall methodological quality of the literature was moderate according to the AMSTAR scale. In these articles, thirteen quality assessment tools and 32 author self-defined criteria were used. The three most widely used tools were the Drummond checklist (19.4%), the BMJ checklist (15.8%), the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement (12.7%). Others included the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES), the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria (CHEC), the checklist of Center for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD), the Philips checklist, the World Health Organization (WHO) checklist, the checklist of Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP), the Pediatric Quality Appraisal Questionnaire (PQAQ), the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist, Spanish and Chinese guidelines. The quantitative scales used in these literature were the QHES and PQAQ. Evidence showed that pharmacoeconomic systematic reviews' methodology remained to be improved, and the quality assessment criteria were gradually unified. Multiple scales can be used in combination to evaluate the quality of economic research in different settings and types.
ISSN:1932-6203
1932-6203
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0246080