NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Walker DG, Wilson RF, Sharma R, et al. Best Practices for Conducting Economic Evaluations in Health Care: A Systematic Review of Quality Assessment Tools [Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2012 Oct.

Cover of Best Practices for Conducting Economic Evaluations in Health Care: A Systematic Review of Quality Assessment Tools

Best Practices for Conducting Economic Evaluations in Health Care: A Systematic Review of Quality Assessment Tools [Internet].

Show details

References

1.
Pignone M, Saha S, Hoerger T, et al. Challenges in systematic reviews of economic analyses. Ann Intern Med. 2005;142(12 Pt 2):1073–9. [PubMed: 15968032]
2.
Colmenero F, Sullivan SD, Palmer JA, et al. Quality of clinical and economic evidence in dossier formulary submissions. Am. J. Managed Care. 2007;13(7):401–7. [PubMed: 17620035]
3.
Jefferson T, Demicheli V, Vale L. Quality of systematic reviews of economic evaluations in health care. JAMA. 2002;287(21):2809–12. [PubMed: 12038919]
4.
Carande-Kulis VG, Maciosek MV, Briss PA, et al. Methods for systematic reviews of economic evaluations for the Guide to Community Preventive Services. Task Force on Community Preventive Services. Am J Prev Med. 2000;18(1 Suppl):75–91. [PubMed: 10806980]
5.
Harris RP, Helfand M, Woolf SH, et al. Current methods of the US Preventive Services Task Force: a review of the process. Am J Prev Med. 2001;20(3 Suppl):21–35. [PubMed: 11306229]
6.
Fox DM. Evidence of evidence-based health policy: the politics of systematic reviews in coverage decisions. Health Aff (Millwood) 2005;24(1):114–22. [PubMed: 15647221]
7.
Garber AM. Cost-effectiveness and evidence evaluation as criteria for coverage policy. Health Aff (Millwood) 2004.:W4-284–96. Suppl.Web Exclusives. [PubMed: 15451997]
8.
The Cochrane Collection. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.0 edition. Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. 2008.
9.
NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Undertaking systematic reviews of research on effectiveness: CRD's guidance for carrying out or commissioning reviews (2nd Edition). York: University of York: NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination; 2001. CRD Report 4.
10.
Tunis S, Carino TV, Williams RD II, Bach PB. Federal initiatives to support rapid learning about new technologies. Health Affairs. 2007;26(2):w140–9. [PubMed: 17259196]
11.
Tunis SR, Pearson SD. Coverage options for promising technologies: Medicare's ‘coverage with evidence development’ Health Aff (Millwood) 2006;25(5):1218–30. [PubMed: 16966717]
12.
American College of Physicians. Information on cost-effectiveness: an essential product of a national comparative effectiveness program. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(12):956–61. [PubMed: 18483128]
13.
Garber A. A menu without prices. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(12):964–6. [PubMed: 18483127]
14.
Wilensky G. Cost-effectiveness information: yes, it's important, but keep it separate, please! Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(12):967–8. [PubMed: 18483126]
15.
Berger ML, Teutsch S. Cost-effectiveness analysis: from science to application. Med Care. 2005;43(7 Suppl):49–53. [PubMed: 16056009]
16.
Aspinall S, Good C, Glassman P, Valentino M. The evolving use of cost-effectiveness analysis in formulary management within the Department of Veterans Affairs. Med Care. 2005;43(7):II, 20-ii–26. [PubMed: 16056005]
17.
Neumann PJ, Palmer JA, Daniels N, Quigley K, Gold MR, Chao S. A strategic plan for integrating cost-effectiveness analysis into the US healthcare system. Am J Manag Care. 2008;14(4):185–8. [PubMed: 18402510]
18.
Eddy D. Reflections on science, judgment, and value in evidence-based decision making: a conversation with David Eddy by Sean R. Tunis. Health Aff (Millwood) 2007;26(4):w500–15. [PubMed: 17580317]
19.
Neumann PJ, Greenberg D, Olchanski NV, et al. Growth and quality of the cost-utility literature, 1976-2001. Value Health. 2005;8(1):3–9. [PubMed: 15841889]
20.
O'Donnell JC, Pham SV, Pashos CL, et al. Health technology assessment in evidence-based health care reimbursement decisions around the world: an overview. Value Health. 2009;12 Suppl.2:S1–5. [PubMed: 19523179]
21.
Jefferson T, Mugford M, Gray A, Demicheli V. An exercise on the feasibility of carrying out secondary economic analyses. Health Econ. 1996;5(2):155–65. [PubMed: 8733107]
22.
Tobin GA, Begley CM. Methodological rigour within a qualitative framework. J Adv Nurs. 2004;48(4):388–96. [PubMed: 15500533]
23.
Evers S, Goossens M, de Vet H, et al. Criteria list for assessment of methodological quality of economic evaluations: Consensus on Health Economic Criteria. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005;21(2):240–5. [PubMed: 15921065]
24.
Chiou CF, Hay JW, Wallace JF, et al. Development and validation of a grading system for the quality of cost-effectiveness studies. Med Care. 2003;41(1):32–44. [PubMed: 12544542]
25.
Ungar WJ, Santos MT. The Pediatric Quality Appraisal Questionnaire: an instrument for evaluation of the pediatric health economics literature. Value Health. 2003;6(5):584–94. [PubMed: 14627065]
26.
Adams ME, McCall NT, Gray DT, Orza MJ, Chalmers TC. Economic analysis in randomized control trials. Med Care. 1992;30(3):231–43. [PubMed: 1538611]
27.
Drummond MF, Sculpher ML, Torrance GW, et al. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. 3rd Ed. Oxford Medical Publications, Oxford University Press Inc.; New York, NY: 2005.
28.
Gerard K. Cost-utility in practice: a policy maker's guide to the state of the art. Health Policy. 1992;21(3):249–79. [PubMed: 10120196]
29.
Sacristan JA, Soto J, Galende I. Evaluation of pharmacoeconomic studies: utilization of a checklist. Ann Pharmacother. 1993;27(9):1126–33. [PubMed: 8219449]
30.
Clemens K, Townsend R, Luscombe F, Mauskopf J, Osterhaus J, Bobula J. Methodological and conduct principles for pharmacoeconomic research. Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. Pharmacoeconomics. 1995;8(2):169–74. [PubMed: 10155611]
31.
Russell LB, Gold MR, Siegel JE, Daniels N, Weinstein MC. The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in health and medicine. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA. 1996;276(14):1172–7. [PubMed: 8827972]
32.
Weinstein MC, Siegel JE, Gold MR, Kamlet MS, Russell LB. Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA. 1996;276(15):1253–8. [PubMed: 8849754]
33.
Siegel JE, Weinstein MC, Russell LB, Gold MR. Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA. 1996;276(16):1339–41. [PubMed: 8861994]
34.
Gold MR, Russell LB, Siegel JE, Weinstein MC. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1996.
35.
Drummond MF, Jefferson TO. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. The BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party. BMJ. 1996;313(7052):275–83. [PMC free article: PMC2351717] [PubMed: 8704542]
36.
Grutters JP, Seferina SC, Tjan-Heijnen VC, van Kampen RJ, Goettsch WG, Joore MA. Bridging trial and decision: a checklist to frame health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions. Value Health. 2011;14(5):777–84. [PubMed: 21839418]
37.
Gerkens S, Crott R, Cleemput I, et al. Comparison of Three Instruments Assessing the Quality of Economic Evaluations: a Practical Exercise on Economic Evaluations of the Surgical Treatment of Obesity. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24(3):318–25. [PubMed: 18601800]
38.
Au F, Prahardhi S, Shiell A. Reliability of two instruments for critical assessment of economic evaluations. Value Health. 2008;11(3):435–9. [PubMed: 18489667]
39.
Agha Z, Lofgren RP, VanRuiswyk JV. Is antibiotic prophylaxis for bacterial endocarditis cost-effective? Med Decis Making. 2005;25(3):308–20. [PubMed: 15951458]
40.
Williams A. The cost-benefit approach. Br Med Bull. 1974;30(3):252–6. [PubMed: 4458903]
41.
Maynard A. Economic evaluation techniques in healthcare. Reinventing the wheel? Pharmacoeconomics. 1997;11(2):115–8. [PubMed: 10172934]
42.
Juni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, Egger M. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA. 1999;282(11):1054–60. [PubMed: 10493204]
43.
Lincoln TM, Rief W. How much do sample characteristics affect the effect size? An investigation of studies testing the treatment effects for social phobia. J Anxiety Disord. 2004;18(4):515–29. [PubMed: 15149711]
44.
Philips Z, Bojke L, Sculpher M, et al. Good practice guidelines for decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment: a review and consolidation of quality assessment. Pharmacoeconomics. 2006;24(4):355–71. [PubMed: 16605282]
45.
Cooper N, Coyle D, Abrams K, Mugford M, Sutton A. Use of evidence in decision models: an appraisal of health technology assessments in the UK since 1997. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10(4):245–50. [PubMed: 16259692]
46.
Baladi JF, Menon D, Otten N. Use of economic evaluation guidelines: 2 years' experience in Canada. Health Econ (GBR) 1998;7(3):221–7. [PubMed: 9639335]
47.
Drummond M, Richardson W, O'Brien B, Levine M, Heyland D. Users' guides to the medical literature. XIII. How to use an article on economic analysis of clinical practice. A. Are the results of the study valid? JAMA. 1997;277(19):1552–7. [PubMed: 9153371]

Views

  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (629K)

Related information

  • PMC
    PubMed Central citations
  • PubMed
    Links to PubMed

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...