Suppr超能文献

方法学差异如何影响经济分析结果:干扰素 γ 释放试验诊断 LTBI 的系统评价。

How methodologic differences affect results of economic analyses: a systematic review of interferon gamma release assays for the diagnosis of LTBI.

机构信息

Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e56044. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0056044. Epub 2013 Mar 7.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Cost effectiveness analyses (CEA) can provide useful information on how to invest limited funds, however they are less useful if different analysis of the same intervention provide unclear or contradictory results. The objective of our study was to conduct a systematic review of methodologic aspects of CEA that evaluate Interferon Gamma Release Assays (IGRA) for the detection of Latent Tuberculosis Infection (LTBI), in order to understand how differences affect study results.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies was conducted with particular focus on study quality and the variability in inputs used in models used to assess cost-effectiveness. A common decision analysis model of the IGRA versus Tuberculin Skin Test (TST) screening strategy was developed and used to quantify the impact on predicted results of observed differences of model inputs taken from the studies identified.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were ultimately included in the review. Several specific methodologic issues were identified across studies, including how study inputs were selected, inconsistencies in the costing approach, the utility of the QALY (Quality Adjusted Life Year) as the effectiveness outcome, and how authors choose to present and interpret study results. When the IGRA versus TST test strategies were compared using our common decision analysis model predicted effectiveness largely overlapped.

IMPLICATIONS

Many methodologic issues that contribute to inconsistent results and reduced study quality were identified in studies that assessed the cost-effectiveness of the IGRA test. More specific and relevant guidelines are needed in order to help authors standardize modelling approaches, inputs, assumptions and how results are presented and interpreted.

摘要

简介

成本效益分析(CEA)可以为如何投资有限的资金提供有用的信息,但是如果对同一干预措施的不同分析提供了不清楚或矛盾的结果,那么它们的作用就不大了。我们的研究目的是对评估潜伏性结核感染(LTBI)的干扰素γ释放测定(IGRA)的成本效益分析的方法学方面进行系统评价,以了解差异如何影响研究结果。

方法

对研究进行了系统评价,特别关注研究质量和用于评估成本效益的模型中使用的输入变量的可变性。开发了一个 IGRA 与结核菌素皮肤试验(TST)筛查策略的通用决策分析模型,并用于量化从确定的研究中观察到的模型输入差异对预测结果的影响。

结果

最终有 13 项研究被纳入综述。在研究中发现了几个具体的方法学问题,包括如何选择研究输入、成本核算方法的不一致性、QALY(质量调整生命年)作为有效性结果的效用,以及作者如何选择和解释研究结果。当使用我们的通用决策分析模型比较 IGRA 与 TST 测试策略时,预测的有效性结果基本重叠。

意义

在评估 IGRA 测试成本效益的研究中,发现了许多导致结果不一致和研究质量降低的方法学问题。需要更具体和相关的指南,以帮助作者规范建模方法、输入、假设以及结果的呈现和解释。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f309/3591384/bcdb685cd7d7/pone.0056044.g001.jpg

相似文献

3
A Systematic Review of Studies Evaluating the Cost Utility of Screening High-Risk Populations for Latent Tuberculosis Infection.
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2015 Aug;13(4):325-40. doi: 10.1007/s40258-015-0183-4.
5
Systematic review of cost and cost-effectiveness of different TB-screening strategies.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2011 Sep 30;11:247. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-11-247.
7
Cost Effectiveness of Preventive Treatment for Tuberculosis in Special High-Risk Populations.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2015 Aug;33(8):783-809. doi: 10.1007/s40273-015-0267-x.
10
A systematic review on TST and IGRA tests used for diagnosis of LTBI in immigrants.
Mol Diagn Ther. 2015 Feb;19(1):9-24. doi: 10.1007/s40291-014-0125-0.

引用本文的文献

1
Interferon-Gamma Release Assay Testing for Latent Tuberculosis Infection: A Health Technology Assessment.
Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2024 Dec 12;24(11):1-183. eCollection 2024.
2
Screening of household contacts for TB infection in Cote d'Ivoire.
IJTLD Open. 2024 Jan 1;1(1):20-26. doi: 10.5588/ijtldopen.23.0342. eCollection 2024 Jan.
6
Economic and modeling evidence for tuberculosis preventive therapy among people living with HIV: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
PLoS Med. 2021 Sep 14;18(9):e1003712. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003712. eCollection 2021 Sep.
7
Policy and practice of programmatic management of latent tuberculosis infection in The Netherlands.
J Clin Tuberc Other Mycobact Dis. 2017 Mar 18;7:40-48. doi: 10.1016/j.jctube.2017.02.002. eCollection 2017 May.
8
Tuberculosis preventive treatment: the next chapter of tuberculosis elimination in India.
BMJ Glob Health. 2018 Oct 8;3(5):e001135. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-001135. eCollection 2018.
9
Disparities in model-based cost-effectiveness analyses of tuberculosis diagnosis: A systematic review.
PLoS One. 2018 May 9;13(5):e0193293. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193293. eCollection 2018.

本文引用的文献

1
Systematic review of cost and cost-effectiveness of different TB-screening strategies.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2011 Sep 30;11:247. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-11-247.
2
Is scale-up worth it? Challenges in economic analysis of diagnostic tests for tuberculosis.
PLoS Med. 2011 Jul;8(7):e1001063. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001063. Epub 2011 Jul 26.
3
Priorities for screening and treatment of latent tuberculosis infection in the United States.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011 Sep 1;184(5):590-601. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201101-0181OC.
4
Screening of immigrants in the UK for imported latent tuberculosis: a multicentre cohort study and cost-effectiveness analysis.
Lancet Infect Dis. 2011 Jun;11(6):435-44. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(11)70069-X. Epub 2011 Apr 20.
7
Assessing cost-effectiveness in healthcare: history of the $50,000 per QALY threshold.
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2008 Apr;8(2):165-78. doi: 10.1586/14737167.8.2.165.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验