What Guidance are Economists Given on How to Present Economic Evaluations for Policymakers? A Systematic Review

Danish population health measured by the EQ-5D-5L

AIMS

The aims of this study were to provide Danish population norms for the EQ-5D-5L and to assess the measurement properties of the instrument in a Danish population setting.

METHODS

We used data from the Danish 5L valuation study in which a representative sample of the Danish population completed the EQ-5D-5L and answered socio-demographic questions. We generated population norms for the five EQ-5D-5L dimensions, corresponding utility scores and the EQ-5D visual analogue scale (EQ VAS) according to age and sex. Measurement properties of ceiling effects, known-group construct validity and convergent validity were assessed.

RESULTS

The mean EQ-5D-5L utility score for the 1014 respondents completing the EQ-5D-5L was 0.90 (standard deviation (SD)=0.16). No significant differences emerged across age groups (minimum mean utility score=0.88 (SD=0.19); maximum mean utility score=0.93 (SD=0.11)) or sex (mean utility score for women=0.89 (SD=0.17); mean utility score for men=0.91 (SD=0.15)). Statistical differences were found across educational level, occupational status, income and living situation. Similar patterns were observed for the EQ VAS. Generally, respondents most often reported problems with pain and discomfort, but young women most often reported problems with anxiety/depression. There was a significant strong correlation between EQ-5D-5L utility and the EQ VAS and a significant correlation between overall health and each of the five EQ-5D-5L dimensions. The overall ceiling effect for the EQ-5D-5L was 39% (compared to 56% for the EQ-5D-3L).

CONCLUSIONS

Danish population norms for the EQ-5D-5L are now available. We found fewer ceiling effects for the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L, and we provide evidence for convergent and known-group validity of the EQ-5D-5L.

Were economic evaluations well reported for the newly listed oncology drugs in China's national reimbursement drug list

PURPOSE

To assess the reporting quality of published economic evaluations of the negotiated oncology drugs listed for China's 2020 National Reimbursement Drug List (NRDL).

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted to identify economic evaluation studies of negotiated oncology drugs listed in China's 2020 NRDL using the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, SinoMed, and WanFang Database up to March 31, 2021. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist scored the reporting quality between 0 and 100. A linear regression analysis was employed to examine the influence of various characteristics on the reporting quality scores.

RESULTS

Eighty papers were included in the study, with the majority published during the past decade. Furthermore, more than half of the articles (57.5%, or 46 out of 80) were written in English. The average CHEERS score was 74.63 ± 12.75 and ranged from 43.48 to 93.75. The most inadequately reported items included choice of model, characterization of heterogeneity, and discussion, as well as currency, price date and conversion. Higher scores were associated with articles published from 2019 to 2021 and English publications.

CONCLUSION

The economic evaluation studies of negotiated oncology drugs listed in 2020 NRDL had moderate reporting quality. The Chinese economic evaluation publications could improve the reporting quality if the CHEERS checklist is consistently implemented. Also, the Chinese journals maybe explore introducing a reporting standard for economic evaluations.

Review of study reporting guidelines for clinical studies using artificial intelligence in healthcare

High-quality research is essential in guiding evidence-based care, and should be reported in a way that is reproducible, transparent and where appropriate, provide sufficient detail for inclusion in future meta-analyses. Reporting guidelines for various study designs have been widely used for clinical (and preclinical) studies, consisting of checklists with a minimum set of points for inclusion. With the recent rise in volume of research using artificial intelligence (AI), additional factors need to be evaluated, which do not neatly conform to traditional reporting guidelines (eg, details relating to technical algorithm development). In this review, reporting guidelines are highlighted to promote awareness of essential content required for studies evaluating AI interventions in healthcare. These include published and in progress extensions to well-known reporting guidelines such as Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials-AI (study protocols), Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-AI (randomised controlled trials), Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-AI (diagnostic accuracy studies) and Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis-AI (prediction model studies). Additionally there are a number of guidelines that consider AI for health interventions more generally (eg, Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging (CLAIM), minimum information (MI)-CLAIM, MI for Medical AI Reporting) or address a specific element such as the ‘learning curve’ (Developmental and Exploratory Clinical Investigation of Decision-AI). Economic evaluation of AI health interventions is not currently addressed, and may benefit from extension to an existing guideline. In the face of a rapid influx of studies of AI health interventions, reporting guidelines help ensure that investigators and those appraising studies consider both the well-recognised elements of good study design and reporting, while also adequately addressing new challenges posed by AI-specific elements.

A cross-sectional study on the determinants of health-related quality of life in the Philippines using the EQ-5D-5L

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to identify the determinants of Filipinos' health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

METHODS

Data were collected from 1000 Filipinos across the nation who reported that they did not have known active disease or disability. HRQoL was measured through EuroQoL's (EQ) 5-level tool (EQ-5D-5L) and the EQ Visual Analog Scale (EQ-VAS). Both were implemented via the EQ Valuation Technology software. HRQoL was regressed on socioeconomic characteristics (age, sex, marital status, educational attainment, employment, poverty status, and availability of savings), social support factors (religion, religious attendance, and caregiving status), community- or societal-level factors (type and major island group of residence), and disease status.

RESULTS

Majority of respondents reported that they did not have any problems across all EQ-5D-5L dimensions, namely mobility, self-care, usual activity, pain or discomfort, and anxiety or depression. Pain or discomfort had the highest rate of respondents reporting slight to extreme problems followed by anxiety or depression. Having savings was positively associated with HRQoL, while religious attendance, caregiver status, living in an urban area, living in Visayas or Mindanao, and having a diagnosed disease were negatively associated with HRQoL.

CONCLUSION

This current study confirms that HRQoL varied across socioeconomic statuses and communities in the Philippines.

Challenges of Systematic Reviews of Economic Evaluations: A Review of Recent Reviews and an Obesity Case Study

Decision makers increasingly require cost-effectiveness evidence to inform resource allocation and the need for systematic reviews of economic evaluations (SREEs) has grown accordingly. The objective of this article is to describe current practice and identify unique challenges in conducting and reporting SREEs. Current guideline documents for SREEs were consulted and summarised. A rapid review of English-language SREEs, using MEDLINE and EMBASE, published in 2017/2018, containing at least 20 studies was undertaken to describe current practice. Information on data extraction methods, quality assessment (QA) tools and reporting methods were narratively summarised. Lessons learned from a recently conducted SREE of weight loss interventions for severely obese adults were discussed. Sixty-three publications were included in the rapid review. Substantial heterogeneity in review methods, reporting standards and QA approaches was evident. Our recently conducted SREE on weight loss interventions identified scope to improve process efficiency, opportunity for more transparent and succinct reporting, and potential to improve consistency of QA. Practical solutions may include (1) using pre-piloted data extraction forms linked explicitly to results tables; (2) consistently reporting on key assumptions and sensitivity analyses that drive results; and (3) using checklists that include topic-specific items where relevant and allow reviewers to distinguish between reporting, justification and QA. The lack of a mutually agreed, standardised set of best practice guidelines has led to substantial heterogeneity in the conduct and reporting of SREEs. Future work is required to standardise the approach to conducting SREEs so that they can generate efficient, timely and relevant evidence to support decision-making. We suggest only data extracting information that will be reported, focusing discussion around the key drivers of cost-effectiveness, and improving consistency in QA by distinguishing between what is reported, justified by authors and deemed appropriate by the reviewer.

Changes in health-related quality of life of Chinese populations measured by the EQ-5D-3 L: a comparison of the 2008 and 2013 National Health Services Surveys

BACKGROUNDS

The EuroQol Group Five-Dimensional (EQ-5D) instruments have been validated in China for measuring health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and are increasingly being used in health economic studies. However, there is paucity in the literature documenting long-term changes in the EQ-5D results in the Chinese populations. This study aims to identify such changes and their determinants using the EQ-5D-3 L instrument.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the National Health Services Surveys in China, which included the EQ-5D-3 L since 2008. We compared the differences between the 2008 and 2013 surveys in the percentage of reported problems, visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, and the EQ-5D-3 L utility index derived from the national value sets. Factors associated with population changes in these EQ-5D results were identified using logistic, linear and Tobit regression models, respectively.

RESULTS

Compared with 2008, reported problems in self-care (3.3% vs 3.1%), usual activities (4.8% vs 4.6%) and anxiety/depression (6.4% vs 5.3%) decreased, whereas reported problems in mobility (5.1% vs 5.9%) and pain/discomfort (9.3% vs 12.6%) increased significantly (p < 0.05) in 2013. The regression models revealed a rise (β = 1.61, p < 0.001) in VAS scores, but a slight drop (β = - 0.01, p < 0.001) in utility index in 2013 compared with 2008 after controlling for variations in demographic, behavioral, socioeconomic and residential variables. But the effect sizes of the changes over time (estimated by "average change divided by baseline standard deviation") did not reach the threshold of clinical importance after adjustment for variations in other factors. Higher socioeconomic status (in terms of education, income and residential location) was associated with better EQ-5D-3 L results.

CONCLUSION

The changing trend (decrease) of the utility index is contradictory to that (increase) of the VAS scores, although neither is deemed clinically important. It is evident that socioeconomic and regional disparities in HRQoL exist in China.

The potential role of cost-utility analysis in the decision to implement major system change in acute stroke services in metropolitan areas in England

Background

The economic implications of major system change are an important component of the decision to implement health service reconfigurations. Little is known about how best to report the results of economic evaluations of major system change to inform decision-makers. Reconfiguration of acute stroke care in two metropolitan areas in England, namely London and Greater Manchester (GM), was used to analyse the economic implications of two different implementation strategies for major system change.

Methods

A decision analytic model was used to calculate difference-in-differences in costs and outcomes before and after the implementation of two major system change strategies in stroke care in London and GM. Values in the model were based on patient level data from Hospital Episode Statistics, linked mortality data from the Office of National Statistics and data from two national stroke audits. Results were presented as net monetary benefit (NMB) and using Programme Budgeting and Marginal Analysis (PBMA) to assess the costs and benefits of a hypothetical typical region in England with approximately 4000 strokes a year.

Results

In London, after 90 days, there were nine fewer deaths per 1000 patients compared to the rest of England (95% CI –24 to 6) at an additional cost of £770,027 per 1000 stroke patients admitted. There were two additional deaths (95% CI –19 to 23) in GM, with a total costs saving of £156,118 per 1000 patients compared to the rest of England. At a £30,000 willingness to pay the NMB was higher in London and GM than the rest of England over the same time period. The results of the PBMA suggest that a GM style reconfiguration could result in a total greater health benefit to a region. Implementation costs were £136 per patient in London and £75 in GM.

Conclusions

The implementation of major system change in acute stroke care may result in a net health benefit to a region, even one functioning within a fixed budget. The choice of what model of stroke reconfiguration to implement may depend on the relative importance of clinical versus cost outcomes.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12961-018-0301-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Health-related quality of life measured using the EQ-5D-5L: South Australian population norms

BACKGROUND

Although a five level version of the widely-used EuroQol 5 dimensions (EQ-5D) instrument has been developed, population norms are not yet available for Australia to inform the future valuation of health in economic evaluations. The aim of this study was to estimate HrQOL normative values for the EQ-5D-5L preference-based measure in a large, randomly selected, community sample in South Australia.

METHODS

The EQ-5D-5L instrument was included in the 2013 South Australian Health Omnibus Survey, an interviewer-administered, face-to-face, cross-sectional survey. Respondents rated their level of impairment across dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression) and global health rating on a visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS). Utility scores were derived using the newly-developed UK general population-based algorithm and relationships between utility and EQ-VAS scores and socio-demographic factors were also explored using multivariate regression analyses.

RESULTS

Ultimately, 2,908 adults participated in the survey (63.4 % participation rate). The mean utility and EQ-VAS scores were 0.91 (95 CI 0.90, 0.91) and 78.55 (95 % CI 77.95, 79.15), respectively. Almost half of respondents reported no problems across all dimensions (42.8 %), whereas only 7.2 % rated their health >90 on the EQ-VAS (100 = the best health you can imagine). Younger age, male gender, longer duration of education, higher annual household income, employment and marriage/de facto relationships were all independent, statistically significant predictors of better health status (p < 0.01) measured with the EQ-VAS. Only age and employment status were associated with higher utility scores, indicating fundamental differences between these measures of health status.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first Australian study to apply the EQ-5D-5L in a large, community sample. Overall, findings are consistent with EQ-5D-5L utility and VAS scores reported for other countries and indicate that the majority of South Australian adults report themselves in full health. When valuing health in Australian economic evaluations, the utility population norms can be used to estimate HrQOL. More generally, the EQ-VAS score may be a better measure of population health given the smaller ceiling effect and broader coverage of HrQOL dimensions. Further research is recommended to update EQ-5D-5L population norms using the Australian general population specific scoring algorithm once this becomes publically available.

Protocol for a systematic review of preference-based instruments for measuring care-related outcomes and their suitability for the palliative care setting

INTRODUCTION

Despite informal caregivers' integral role in supporting people affected by disease or disability, economic evaluations often ignore the costs and benefits experienced by this group, especially in the palliative setting. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify preference-based instruments for measuring care-related outcomes and provide guidance on the selection of instrument in palliative care economic evaluations.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A comprehensive search of the literature will be conducted from database inception (ASSIA; CINAHL; Cochrane library including DARE, NHS EED, HTA; Econlit; Embase; PsychINFO; PubMed). Published peer-reviewed, English-language articles reporting preference-based instruments for measuring care-related outcomes in any clinical area will be included. One researcher will complete the searches and screen the results for potentially eligible studies. A randomly selected subset of 10% citations will be independently screened by two researchers. Any disagreement will be resolved by consensus among the research team. Subsequently, a supplementary search will identify studies detailing the development, valuation, validation and application of the identified instruments. The degree of suitability of the instruments for palliative economic evaluations will be assessed using criteria in the International Society for Quality of Life Research minimum standards for patient-reported outcome measures, the checklist for reporting valuation studies of multiattribute utility-based instruments and information on the development of the instrument in the palliative setting. A narrative summary of the included studies and instruments will be provided; similarities and differences will be described and possible reasons for variations explored. Recommendations for practice on selection of instruments in palliative care economic analyses will be provided.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This is a planned systematic review of published literature. Therefore, ethics approval to conduct this research is not required. Findings will be presented at leading palliative care and health economic conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016034188.