1
|
Kip MMA, IJzerman MJ, Henriksson M, Merlin T, Weinstein MC, Phelps CE, Kusters R, Koffijberg H. Toward Alignment in the Reporting of Economic Evaluations of Diagnostic Tests and Biomarkers: The AGREEDT Checklist. Med Decis Making 2019; 38:778-788. [PMID: 30248275 PMCID: PMC6454580 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x18797590] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/02/2022]
Abstract
Objectives. General frameworks for conducting and reporting health economic
evaluations are available but not specific enough to cover the intricacies of the
evaluation of diagnostic tests and biomarkers. Such evaluations are typically complex and
model-based because tests primarily affect health outcomes indirectly and real-world data
on health outcomes are often lacking. Moreover, not all aspects relevant to the evaluation
of a diagnostic test may be known and explicitly considered for inclusion in the
evaluation, leading to a loss of transparency and replicability. To address this
challenge, this study aims to develop a comprehensive reporting checklist.
Methods. This study consisted of 3 main steps: 1) the development of an
initial checklist based on a scoping review, 2) review and critical appraisal of the
initial checklist by 4 independent experts, and 3) development of a final checklist. Each
item from the checklist is illustrated using an example from previous research.
Results. The scoping review followed by critical review by the 4 experts
resulted in a checklist containing 44 items, which ideally should be considered for
inclusion in a model-based health economic evaluation. The extent to which these items
were included or discussed in the studies identified in the scoping review varied
substantially, with 14 items not being mentioned in ≥47 (75%) of the included studies.
Conclusions. The reporting checklist developed in this study may contribute
to improved transparency and completeness of model-based health economic evaluations of
diagnostic tests and biomarkers. Use of this checklist is therefore encouraged to enhance
the interpretation, comparability, and—indirectly—the validity of the results of such
evaluations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michelle M A Kip
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Faculty of Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Maarten J IJzerman
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Faculty of Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Martin Henriksson
- Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
| | - Tracy Merlin
- Adelaide Health Technology Assessment (AHTA), School of Public Health, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Milton C Weinstein
- Department of Health Policy and Management Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA
| | - Charles E Phelps
- Departments of Economics, Political Science, and Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY
| | - Ron Kusters
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Faculty of Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands.,Laboratory for Clinical Chemistry and Haematology, Jeroen Bosch Ziekenhuis, Den Bosch, the Netherlands
| | - Hendrik Koffijberg
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Faculty of Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|