Quality appraisal of pediatric health economic evaluations

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 203-210

  Ungar, Wendy J ^a,b   Santos, Maria T ^a  

^a HOSPITAL FOR SICK CHILDREN   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Cost effectiveness analysis; Economic evaluation; Pediatrics; Quality appraisal

Indexed keywords

ECONOMICS; PEDIATRICS; QUALITY ASSURANCE;

ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS; HEALTH ECONOMIC METHODOLOGY; INCREMENTAL ANALYSIS; QUALITY APPRAISALS;

HEALTH CARE;

CHILD HEALTH CARE; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HEALTH PROGRAM; NEWBORN CARE; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PEDIATRIC QUALITY APPRAISAL QUESTIONNAIRE; PEDIATRICS; PREDICTION; PUBLICATION; QUALITY CONTROL; QUESTIONNAIRE; RATING SCALE; REVIEW; SCORING SYSTEM;

EID: 18544372919     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/s0266462305050270     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Adams ME, McCall NT, Gray DT, Orza MJ, Chalmers TC. Economic analysis in randomized control trials. Med Care. 1992;30:231-243.
2. Anell A, Norinder A. Health outcome measures used in cost-effectiveness studies: A review of original articles published between 1986 and 1996. Health Policy. 2000;51:87-99.
3. Blackmore CC, Magid DJ. Methodologic evaluation of the radiology cost-effectiveness literature. Radiology. 1997;203:87-91.
4. Bradley CA, Iskedjian M, Lanctot KL, et al. Quality assessment of economic evaluations in selected pharmacy, medical, and health economics journals. Ann Pharmacother. 1995;29:681-689.
5. Briggs A, Sculpher M. Sensitivity analysis in economic evaluation: A review of published studies. Health Econ. 1995;4:355-371.
6. Bronfenbrenner U, Moen P, Garbarino J. Families and communities. In: Parke HR, ed. Review of child development research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1984.
7. Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment. Guidelines for the economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals: Canada. 2nd ed. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment; 1997. Available at: http://www.ccohta.ca/ccohta_production/entry_e.html. Accessed: September 6, 2002.
8. Drummond MF, O'Brien B, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programs. 2nd ed. Toronto, ON: Oxford University Press; 1997.
9. Elixhauser A, Halpern M, Schmier J, Luce BR. Health care CBA and CEA from 1991 to 1996: an updated bibliography. Med Care. 1998;36(Suppl):MS1-MS9, MS18-MS147.
10. Elixhauser A, Luce BR, Taylor WR, Reblando J. Health care CBA/CEA: An update on the growth and composition of the literature. Med Care. 1993;31 (Suppl):JS1-JS11, JS18-JS149.
11. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group (Canada). Worksheet for using an article about an economic analysis. Edmonton, AB: The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group, University of Alberta; 2000. Available at: http://www.med. ualberta.ca/ebm/econ.htm. Accessed: September 6, 2002.
12. Ganiats TG, Wong AF. Evaluation of cost-effectiveness research: A survey of recent publications. Fam Med. 1991;23:457-462.
13. Gerard K, Seymour J, Smoker I. A tool to improve quality of reporting published economic analyses. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2000;16:100-110.
14. Gerard K. Cost-utility in practice: A policy maker's guide to the state of the art. Health Policy. 1992;21:249-279.
15. Halfon N, Newacheck PW. Characterizing the social impact of asthma in children. In: Weiss KB, Buist AS, Sullivan SD, eds. Asthma's impact on society, the social and economic burden. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker Inc; 2000.
16. Practice Management Information Corporation. ICD-9-CM: International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision: clinical modification. 5th ed. Los Angeles, CA: Practice Management Information Corporation; 1998.
17. Iskedjian M, Trakas K, Bradley CA, et al. Quality assessment of economic evaluations published in Pharmacoeconomics. The first four years (1992 to 1995). Pharmacoeconomics. 1997;12:685-694.
18. Jacobs J, Bachynsky J, Baladi J. A comparative review of pharmacoecomomic guidelines. Pharmacoeconomics. 1995;8:182-189.
19. Jameson EJ, Wehr E. Drafting national health reform legislation to protect the health interests of children. Stanford Law Policy Rev. Fall 1993:152-176.
20. Lee JT, Sanchez LA. Interpretation of "cost-effective" and soundness of economic evaluations in the pharmacy literature. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1991;48:2622-2627.
21. Perrin JM. Introduction. In: Hobbs N, Perrin MJ, eds. Issues in the care of children with chronic illness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers Inc; 1985.
22. Pritchard C. Trends in economic evaluation. London, UK: Office of Health Economics; 1998. OHE Briefing No. 36.
23. Sacristan JA, Soto J, Galende I. Evaluation of pharmacoeconomic studies: Utilization of a checklist. Ann Pharmacother. 1993;27:1126-1133.
24. SAS Institute. SAS system for Windows [computer program]. Version 8.02. Cary, NC: SAS Institute; 1999.
25. Siegel JE, Weinstein MC, Russell LB, Gold MR. Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA. 1996;276:1339-1341.
26. Starfield B, Newacheck P. Children's health status, health risks and use of health services. In: Schlesinger MJ, Eisenberg L, eds. Children in a changing health system: Assessments and proposals for reform. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1990.
27. Torrance G, Blaker D, Detsky A, et al. Canadian guidelines for economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals. Pharmacoeconomics. 1996;9:535-559.
28. Trakas K, Addis A, Kruk D, Buczek Y, Iskedjian M, Einarson TR. Quality assessment of pharmacoeconomic abstracts of original research articles in selected journals. Ann Pharmacother. 1997;31:423-428.
29. Udvarhelyi IS, Colditz GA, Rai A, Epstein AM. Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses in the medical literature. Are the methods being used correctly? Ann Intern Med. 1992;116:238-244.
30. Ungar W, Santos M. The Pediatric Economic Database Evaluation (PEDE) project. Ottawa ON: Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment (CCOHTA); 2002. Technology Report No. 26. Available at: http://www.ccohta.ca/ ccohta.production/entry_e.html. Accessed: September 6, 2002.
31. Ungar WJ, Santos MT. The Pediatric Economic Database Evaluation (PEDE) project: Establishing a database to study trends in pediatric economic evaluation. Med Care. 2003;41:1142-1152.
32. Ungar WJ, Santos MT. The Pediatric Quality Appraisal Questionnaire (PQAQ): An instrument for evaluation of the pediatric health economics literature. Value Health. 2003;6:584-594.
33. Ungar WJ, Santos MT. Trends in pediatric economic evaluation: 1980 to 1999. Arch Dis Child. 2004;89:26-29.
34. Warner KE, Hutton RC. Cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis in health care. Growth and composition of the literature. Med Care. 1980;18:1069-1084.
35. Zarnke K, Levine MAH, O'Brien BJ. Cost-benefit analyses in the health-care literature: Don't judge a study by its label. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50:813-822.