College of Pharmacy, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2012 Sep 1;30(9):749-62. doi: 10.2165/11590140-000000000-00000.
The aim of the study was to evaluate the quality of pharmacoeconomic studies based in India.
A literature search was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, EconLit, PsycInfo and Google Scholar to identify published work on pharmacoeconomics studies based in India. Articles were included if they were original studies that evaluated pharmaceuticals, were based in India and were conducted between 1990 and 2010. Two reviewers independently reviewed the articles using a subjective 10-point quality scale in addition to the 100-point Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) questionnaire.
Twenty-nine articles published between 1998 and May 2010 were included in the review. The included articles were published in 23 different journals. Each article was written by an average of five authors. The mean subjective quality score of the 29 articles was 7.8 (standard deviation [SD] = 1.3) and the mean QHES scores for the complete pharmacoeconomic studies (n = 24) was 86 (SD = 6). The majority of authors resided in India (62%) at the time of publication and had a medical background (90%). The quality score was significantly (p ≤ 0.05) related to the country of residence of the primary author (non-India = higher) and the study design (randomized controlled trials = higher).
Although the overall quality scores were comparable to (e.g. Nigeria) or higher than (e.g. Zimbabwe) similar studies in other developing countries, key features such as an explicit study perspective and the use of sensitivity analyses were missing in about 40% of the articles. The need for economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals is imperative, especially in developing countries such as India as this helps decision makers allocate scarce resources in a justifiable manner.
本研究旨在评估基于印度的药物经济学研究的质量。
通过 PubMed、MEDLINE、EconLit、PsycInfo 和 Google Scholar 进行文献检索，以确定发表的基于印度的药物经济学研究的文献。纳入标准为：原创研究，评估药物，基于印度，研究时间为 1990 年至 2010 年。两位评审员使用主观的 10 分制评分标准以及 100 分的健康经济研究质量（QHES）问卷对文章进行独立评审。
纳入了 1998 年至 2010 年 5 月发表的 29 篇文章。纳入的文章发表在 23 种不同的期刊上。每篇文章平均有 5 位作者撰写。29 篇文章的主观质量评分平均为 7.8（标准差 [SD] = 1.3），24 篇完整药物经济学研究的 QHES 评分平均为 86（SD = 6）。大多数作者在发表时居住在印度（62%），并具有医学背景（90%）。质量评分与主要作者的居住国（非印度=更高）和研究设计（随机对照试验=更高）显著相关（p≤0.05）。
尽管整体质量评分与其他发展中国家（如尼日利亚）或更高（如津巴布韦）的类似研究相当，但约 40%的文章缺少明确的研究视角和敏感性分析等关键特征。对药品进行经济评估是必不可少的，特别是在印度等发展中国家，因为这有助于决策者以合理的方式分配稀缺资源。
