Section of Hospital Medicine, Department of Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health (CEVR), Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Value Health. 2023 Aug;26(8):1225-1234. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2023.04.004. Epub 2023 Apr 15.
Because existing publication guidelines and checklists have limitations when used to assess the quality of cost-effectiveness analysis, we developed a novel quality assessment tool for cost-effectiveness analyses, differentiating methods and reporting quality and incorporating the relative importance of different quality attributes.
We defined 15 quality domains from a scoping review and identified 72 methods and reporting quality attributes (36 each). After designing a best-worst scaling survey, we fielded an online survey to researchers and practitioners to estimate the relative importance of the attributes in February 2021. We analyzed the survey data using a sequential conditional logit model. The final tool included 48 quality attributes deemed most important for assessing methods and reporting quality (24 each), accompanied by a free and web-based scoring system.
A total of 524 participants completed the methodology section, and 372 completed both methodology and reporting sections. Quality attributes pertaining to the "modeling" and "data inputs and evidence synthesis" domains were deemed most important for methods quality, including "structure of the model reflects the underlying condition and intervention's impact" and "model validation is conducted." Quality attributes pertaining to "modeling" and "Intervention/comparator(s)" domains were considered most important for reporting quality, including "model descriptions are detailed enough for replication." Despite its growing prominence, "equity considerations" were not deemed as important as other quality attributes.
The Criteria for Health Economic Quality Evaluation tool allows users to differentiate methods and reporting as well as quantifies the relative importance of quality attributes. Alongside other considerations, it could help assess and improve the quality of cost-effectiveness evidence to inform value-based decisions.
由于现有发表指南和清单在评估成本效益分析的质量时存在局限性,我们开发了一种新的成本效益分析质量评估工具,区分方法和报告质量,并纳入不同质量属性的相对重要性。
我们从范围综述中定义了 15 个质量领域,并确定了 72 种方法和报告质量属性(各 36 种)。在设计最佳最差标度调查后,我们于 2021 年 2 月向研究人员和从业者进行了在线调查,以估计属性的相对重要性。我们使用顺序条件逻辑回归模型分析了调查数据。最终工具包括 48 个被认为对评估方法和报告质量最重要的质量属性(各 24 个),并附有免费的网络评分系统。
共有 524 名参与者完成了方法部分,372 名参与者完成了方法和报告两部分。与“建模”和“数据输入和证据综合”领域相关的质量属性被认为对方法质量最重要,包括“模型结构反映了潜在的情况和干预的影响”和“进行模型验证”。与“建模”和“干预/比较剂”领域相关的质量属性被认为对报告质量最重要,包括“模型描述足以复制”。尽管其重要性日益突出,但“公平性考虑”并未被视为其他质量属性那么重要。
卫生经济质量评估标准工具允许用户区分方法和报告,并量化质量属性的相对重要性。它可以与其他考虑因素一起使用,有助于评估和提高成本效益证据的质量,以支持基于价值的决策。