York Health Economics Consortium Ltd Enterprise House,Innovation Way,University of
York Health Economics Consortium Ltd Enterprise House,Innovation Way,University of York.
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2017 Jan;33(1):25-31. doi: 10.1017/S0266462316000660. Epub 2017 Mar 27.
Economic evaluation (EE) is an accepted element of decision making and priority setting in healthcare. As the number of published EEs grows, so does the number of systematic reviews (SRs) of EEs. Although search methodology makes an important contribution to SR quality, search methods in reviews of EEs have not been evaluated in detail. We investigated the resources used to identify studies in recent, published SRs of EEs, and assessed whether the resources reflected recommendations.
We searched MEDLINE for SRs of EEs published since January 2013 and extracted the following from eligible reviews: databases searched, health technology assessment (HTA) sources searched, supplementary search techniques used. Results were compared against the minimum search resources recommended by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) (MEDLINE, Embase, NHS EED, EconLit) for economic evidence for single technology appraisals, and resource types suggested in the summary of current best evidence from SuRe Info (economic databases, general databases, HTA databases, HTA agency Web pages, gray literature).
Sixty-five SRs met the inclusion criteria; data were extracted from forty-two. Five reviews (12 percent) met or exceeded the NICE recommended resources. Nine reviews (21 percent) searched at least four of the five types of resource recommended by SuRe Info. Five reviews (12 percent) searched all five. Twenty-three reviews (55 percent) did not meet the NICE recommendations or four of five of the SuRe Info recommended resource types. Search reporting was frequently unclear or incorrect.
Searches conducted for the majority of recently published SRs of EEs do not meet two published approaches.
经济评估（EE）是医疗保健决策和优先级设定的公认要素。随着发表的 EE 数量的增加，对 EE 的系统评价（SR）的数量也在增加。尽管搜索方法对 SR 质量有重要贡献，但对 EE 评价的搜索方法尚未进行详细评估。我们调查了最近发表的 EE 评价 SR 中用于识别研究的资源，并评估了这些资源是否反映了建议。
我们在 MEDLINE 中搜索了自 2013 年 1 月以来发表的 EE 的 SR，并从合格的评价中提取了以下信息：搜索的数据库、搜索的健康技术评估（HTA）资源、使用的补充搜索技术。结果与国家卫生与保健卓越研究所（NICE）为单一技术评估的经济证据推荐的最低搜索资源（MEDLINE、Embase、NHS EED、EconLit）进行了比较，并与 SuRe Info 中当前最佳证据摘要中建议的资源类型（经济数据库、一般数据库、HTA 数据库、HTA 机构网页、灰色文献）进行了比较。
65 篇 SR 符合纳入标准；从 42 篇中提取了数据。五篇评价（12%）符合或超过 NICE 推荐的资源。九篇评价（21%）至少搜索了 SuRe Info 推荐的五种资源类型中的四种。五篇评价（12%）搜索了所有五种资源。23 篇评价（55%）未达到 NICE 建议或 SuRe Info 推荐的五种资源类型中的四种。搜索报告经常不清楚或不正确。
最近发表的大多数 EE 的 SR 进行的搜索不符合两种已发表的方法。
