The Role of Economic Perspectives and Evidence in Systematic Review

Evidence-Based Decisions and Economics: Health Care, Social Welfare, Education and Criminal Justice, Second Edition

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 23-42

  Anderson, Rob ^a   Shemilt, Ian ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EXETER   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Biomedical model of systematic review intervention and outcome focused; Conducting systematic reviews of economic evaluations challenges; Economic evidence and systematic review methods making best of both; Economic perspectives in systematic review; Guidance for conducting systematic reviews of economic studies; Heterogeneity of methods and findings in systematic reviews of 'economic interventions'; Intervention context and intervention costs; Role of economic perspectives and evidence in systematic review; Systematic reviews of economic evidence health care and in developing countries

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857684096     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1002/9781444320398.ch3     Document Type: Chapter

References (108)

1. Anderson R. Systematic reviews of economic evaluations: utility or futility? Health Economics 2009; DOI: 10.1002/ nec.1486; published online as EarlyView at: www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122326496/abstract
2. Kristiansen I, Gosden T. Evaluating economic interventions: a role for non-randomised designs? In: Donaldson C, Mugford M, Vale L (eds) Evidence-Based Health Economics: from effectiveness to efficiency in systematic review. London: BMJ Books, 2002.
3. Aaserud M, Austvoll-Dahlgren A, Kösters J, Oxman A, Ramsay C, Sturm H. Pharmaceutical policies: effects of reference pricing, other pricing, and purchasing policies. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 2.
4. Sturm H, Austvoll-Dahlgren A, Aaserud M, et al. Pharmaceutical policies: effects of financial incentives for prescribers. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 3.
5. Austvoll-Dahlgren A, Aaserud M, Vist G, et al. Pharmaceutical policies: effects of cap and co-payment on rational drug use. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2008, Issue 1.
6. Bero L, Eccles M, Grimshaw J, et al. Cochrane effective practice and organisation of care group. About The Cochrane Collaboration (Cochrane Review Groups (CRGs)) 2009, Issue 3.
7. Aaserud M, Austvoll-Dahlgren A, Sturm H, et al. Pharmaceutical policies: effects on rational drug use, an overview of 13 reviews (Protocol). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 2.
8. Drummond MF, Jefferson TO, on behalf of the BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. British Medical Journal 1996; 313(7052): 275-283.
9. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2008.
10. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Methods for the Development of NICE Public Health Guidance, 2nd edn. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2009.
11. Shemilt I, Mugford M, Byford S, et al. Incorporating economics evidence. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.1 (updated September 2008). Oxford: Cochrane Collaboration, 2008.
12. Shemilt I, Mugford M, Byford S, et al. Campbell Collaboration Methods Policy Brief: economics methods. Oslo: Campbell Collaboration, 2008.
13. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Systematic Reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care, 3rd edn. York: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 2009.
14. Carande-Kulis V, Maciosek M, Briss P, et al. Methods for systematic reviews of economic evaluations for the Guide to Community Preventive Services. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2000; 18(1S): 75-91.
15. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. NHS Economic Evaluation Database. York: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 2010. Available from: www.crd.york. ac.uk/crdweb.
16. Wiley Interscience. HEED: health economics evaluation database. Chichester: Wiley Interscience, 2010. Available from: http://heed.wiley.com.
17. Craig D, Rice S. CRD Report 6: NHS economic evaluation database handbook, 3rd edn. York: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 2007.
18. InterTASC Information Specialists Subgroup. Search Filter Resource: economic evaluations. InterTASC Information Specialists Subgroup, 2010. Available from: www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/intertasc/econ.htm.
19. Evers S, Goossens M, de Vet H, van Tulder M, Ament A. Criteria list for assessment of methodological quality of economic evaluations: Consensus on Health Economic Criteria. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 2005; 21(2): 240-245.
20. Philips Z, Ginnelly L, Sculpher M, et al. Review of guidelines for good practice in decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment. Health Technology Assessment 2004; 8(36): 1-172.
21. Nixon J, Khan KS, Kleijnen J. Summarising economic evaluations in systematic reviews: a new approach. British Medical Journal 2001; 322(7302): 1596-1598.
22. Antonanzas F, Rodríguez-Ibeas R, Juárez C, Hutter F, Lorente R, Pinillos M. Transferability indices for health economic evaluations: methods and applications. Health Economics 2009; 18(6): 629-643.
23. Welte R, Feenstra T, Jager H, Leidl R. A decision chart for assessing and improving the transferability of economic evaluation results between countries. Pharmacoeconomics 2004; 22(13): 857-876.
24. O'Connor D, Green S, Higgins JPT. Defining the review question and developing criteria for including studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Intervention. Version 5.0.1 (updated September 2008). Oxford: Cochrane Collaboration, 2008.
25. Lefebvre C, Manheimer E, Glanville J. Searching for studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.1 (updated September 2008). Oxford: Cochrane Collaboration, 2008.
26. Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ. Selecting studies and collecting data. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.1 (updated September 2008). Oxford: Cochrane Collaboration, 2008.
27. Higgins JPT, Altman DG. Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.1 (updated September 2008). Oxford: Cochrane Collaboration, 2008.
28. Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG. Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.1 (updated September 2008). Oxford: Cochrane Collaboration, 2008.
29. Sterne JAC, Egger M, Moher D. Addressing reporting biases. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention. Version 5.0.1 (updated September 2008). Oxford: Cochrane Collaboration, 2008.
30. Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Higgins JPT, Vist GE, Glasziou P, Guyatt GH. Presenting results and 'summary of findings'tables. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.1 (updated September 2008). Oxford: Cochrane Collaboration, 2008.
31. Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. Interpreting results and drawing conclusions. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.1 (updated September 2008). Oxford: Cochrane Collaboration, 2008.
32. Glasziou P, Irwig L, Bain C, Colditz G. Systematic Reviews in Health Care: a practical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
33. Birks J, Harvey RJ. Donepezil for dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 1.
34. Bower P, Byford S, Barber J, et al. Meta-analysis of data on costs from trials of counselling in primary care: using individual patient data to overcome sample size limitations in economic analyses. British Medical Journal 2003; 326(7401): 1247-1252.
35. Crystal E, Garfinkle MS, Connolly SS, Ginger TT, Sleik K, Yusuf SS. Interventions for preventing post-operative atrial fibrillation in patients undergoing heart surgery. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2004, Issue 4.
36. Halpern MT, Khan ZM, Stanford R, Spayde KM, Golubiewski M. Asthma: resource use and costs for inhaled corticosteroid vs leukotriene modifier treatment-a meta-analysis. Journal of Family Practice 2003; 52(5): 382-389.
37. Linden A, Adams J. Determining if disease management saves money: an introduction to meta-analysis. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 2007; 13(3): 400-407.
38. Rivetti D, Jefferson T, Thomas R, et al. Vaccines for preventing influenza in the elderly. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 3.
39. Cheng AK, Niparko JK. Cost-utility of the cochlear implant in adults: a meta-analysis. Archives of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery 1999; 125(11): 1214-1218.
40. Briggs A. Economic evaluation and clinical trials: size matters. British Medical Journal 2000; 321(7273): 1362-1363.
41. Drummond M. Economic evaluation in health care: is it really useful or are we just kidding ourselves? Australian Economic Review 2004; 37(1): 3-11.
42. Hoffman C, Graf von der Schulenburg JM, on behalf of the EUROMET Group. The influence of economic evaluation studies on decision making. A European survey. Health Policy 2000; 52(3): 179-192.
43. Jan S. Why does economic analysis in health care not get implemented more? Towards a greater understanding of the rules of the game and the costs of decision making. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 2003; 2(1): 17-24.
44. Drummond M, Pang F. Transferability of economic evaluation results. In: Drummond M, McGuire A (eds) Economic Evaluation in Health Care: merging theory with practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
45. Sculpher MJ, Pang FS, Manca A, et al. Generalisability in economic evaluation studies in health care: a review and case studies. Health Technology Assessment 2004; 8(49): 1-192.
46. Drummond M. Evidence-based medicine meets economic evaluation-an agenda for research. In: Donaldson C, Mugford M, Vale L (eds) Evidence-Based Health Economics: from effectiveness to efficiency in systematic review. London: BMJ Books, 2002.
47. Jefferson T, Vale L, Demicheli V. Methodological quality of economic evaluations of health care interventions-evidence from systematic reviews. In: Donaldson C, Mugford M, Vale L (eds) Evidence-Based Health Economics: from effectiveness to efficiency in systematic review. London: BMJ Books, 2002.
48. Sculpher M, Drummond M. Analysis sans frontieres: can we ever make economic evaluations generalisable across jurisdictions? Pharmacoeconomics 2006; 24(11): 1087-1099.
49. Jackson N, Waters E, for the Guidelines for Systematic Reviews in Health Promotion and Public Health Taskforce. Criteria for the systematic review of health promotion and public health interventions. Health Promotion International 2005; 20(4): 367-374.
50. Kraemer HC, Frank E, Kupfer DJ. Moderators of treatment outcomes: clinical, research, and policy importance. Journal of the American Medical Association 2006; 296(10): 1286-1289.
51. Kravitz R, Duan N, Braslow J. Evidence-based medicine, heterogeneity of treatment effects, and the trouble with averages. Milbank Quarterly 2004; 82(4): 661-687.
52. Birch S. As a matter of fact: evidence-based decision-making unplugged. Health Economics 1997; 6(6): 547-559.
53. Birch S, Gafni A. Economics and the evaluation of health care programmes: generalisability of methods and implications for generalisability of results. Health Policy 2003; 64(2): 207-219.
54. Shiell A, Hawe P, Gold L. Complex interventions or complex systems? Implications for health economic evaluation. British Medical Journal 2008; 336(7656): 1281-1283.
55. Craig N, Sutton M. Opportunity costs on trial: new options for encouraging implementation of results from economic evaluations. In: Donald A, Haines A (eds) Getting Research Findings into Practice. London: BMJ Books, 1998.
56. Coast J, Hensher M, Mulligan JA, Sheppard S, Jones J. Conceptual and practical difficulties with the economic evaluation of health services developments. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy 2000; 5(1): 42-48.
57. Buxton MJ, Drummond MF, van Hout BA, et al. Modelling in economic evaluation: an unavoidable fact of life. Health Economics 1997; 6(3): 217-227.
58. Sculpher M, Claxton K, Drummond M, McCabe C. Whither trial-based economic evaluation for health care decision making? Health Economics 2006; 15(7): 677-687.
59. Marsh K. Economic evaluation of criminal justice interventions: a methodological review of the recent literature. In: Dunworth T, Marsh K, Roman J, Mallender J (eds) Cost-Benefit Analysis of Criminal Justice Interventions. Washington DC: Urban Institute Press, in press.
60. McDougall C, Cohen MA, Swaray AP. The costs and benefits of sentencing: a systematic review. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 2003; 587(1): 160-177.
61. Cartwright W. Cost-benefit analysis of drug treatment services: review of the literature. Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics 2000; 3(1): 11-26.
62. Cartwright WS. Economic costs of drug abuse: financial, cost of illness and services. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 2008; 34(2): 224-233.
63. Simoens S, Ludbrook A, Matheson C, Bond C. Pharmacoeconomics of community maintenance for opiate dependence: a review of evidence and methodology. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 2006; 84(1): 28-39.
64. Welsh B, Farrington DP. Monetary costs and benefits of crime prevention programs. In: Tonry M (ed) Crime and Justice: a review of research (Volume 27). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.
65. Sefton TAJ, Byford S, McDaid D, Hills J, Knapp M. Making the Most of It. Economic evaluation in the social welfare field. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2002.
66. Francis J. SCIE's Approach to Economic Evaluation in Social Care. London: Social Care Institute for Excellence, in press.
67. Coren E, Fisher M. The Conduct of Systematic Research Reviews for SCIE Knowledge Reviews. London: Social Care Institute for Excellence, 2006.
68. Macdonald G. Using Systematic Reviews to Improve Social Care (SCIE Report No.4). London: Social Care Institute for Excellence, 2002.
69. Shemilt I. Campbell and Cochrane Economics Methods Group. About The Cochrane Collaboration (Methods Groups) 2010, Issue 2.
70. Campbell and Cochrane Economics Methods Group website. Available from: www.c-cemg.org.
71. Mulligan JA, Walker D, Fox-Rushby J. Economic evaluations of non-communicable disease interventions in developing countries: a critical review of the evidence base. Cost-Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2006; 4(7).
72. Walker D, Fox-Rushby J. Economic evaluation of communicable disease interventions in developing countries: a critical review of the published literature. Health Economics 2000; 9(8): 681-698.
73. Creese A, Floyd K, Alban A, Guinness L. Cost-effectiveness of HIV/AIDS interventions in Africa: a systematic review of the evidence. Lancet 2002; 359(9318): 1635-1643.
74. Goodman CA, Mills AJ. The evidence base on the costeffectiveness of malaria control measures in Africa. Health Policy and Planning 1999; 14(4): 301-312.
75. Teerawattananon Y, Russell S, Mugford M. A systematic review of economic evaluation literature in Thailand: are the data good enough to be used by policy-makers? Pharmacoeconomics 2007; 25 (6): 467-479.
76. Iglesias CP, Drummond MF, Rovira J. Health-care decisionmaking processes in Latin America: problems and prospects for the use of economic evaluation. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 2005; 21(1): 1-14.
77. Pattanaphesuj J, Teerawattananon Y. Identifying Information Regarding Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Policies and Strategies for Reorientation to Mitigate the Impact of HIV/ AIDS in Thailand. Revitalizing HIV prevention and impact mitigation in Thailand. Nonthaburi: Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program, 2008.
78. Sweat MD. A Framework for Classifying HIV Prevention Interventions. Geneva: Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), 2008.
79. Clapton J, Rutter D, Sharif N. SCIE Systematic Mapping Guidance (SCIE Research Resource 03). London: Social Care Institute for Excellence. Available from: www.scie.org.uk/publications/researchresources/rr03.asp.
80. Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Coordinating Centre. Mapping and refining the review's scope. London: Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre. Available from: http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/Default.aspx?tabid175.
81. Pignone M, Saha S, Hoerger T, Lohr K, Teutsch S, Mandelblatt J. Challenges in systematic reviews of economic evaluations. Annals of Internal Medicine 2005; 142(12): 1073-1079.
82. Drummond MF, Barbieri M, Wong JB. Analytic choices in economic models of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis. What makes a difference? Medical Decision Making 2005; 25(5): 520-533.
83. Shemilt I, Thomas J, Morciano M. A new web-based tool for adjusting costs to a common currency and price year. Evidence and Policy, submitted.
84. Slavin RE. Best evidence synthesis: an intelligent alternative to meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1995 48(1): 9-18.
85. Higgins JPT, Green S (eds). Guide to the contents of a Cochrane protocol and review. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.1 (updated September 2008). Oxford: Cochrane Collaboration, 2008.
86. Byford S, Sefton T. Economic evaluation of complex health and social care interventions. National Institute Economic Review 2003; 186(1): 98-108.
87. Godber E, Robinson R, Steiner A. Economic evaluation and the shifting balance towards primary care: definitions, evidence and methodological issues. Health Economics 1997; 6(3): 275-294.
88. Kelly M, McDaid D, Ludbrook A, Powell J. Economic Appraisal of Public Health Interventions (HDA Briefing Paper). London: Health Development Agency, 2005.
89. Cooper N, Coyle D, Abrams K, Mugford M, Sutton A. Use of evidence in decision models: an appraisal of health technology assessments in the UK to date. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy 2005; 10: 245-250.
90. Pawson R. Evidence-Based Policy: a realist perspective. London: Sage Publications, 2006.
91. Pawson R, Greenhalgh T, Harvey G, Walshe K. Realist review-a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy 2005; 10(suppl 1): S1:21-S1:34.
92. Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: the promise of 'realist synthesis'. Evaluation 2002; 8(3): 340-358.
93. Hammersley M. Systematic or Unsystematic, Is That The Question? Some reflections on the science, art and politics of reviewing research evidence. London: Health Development Agency Public Health Steering Group, 2002. Available from: www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/sys-unsys-phesghammersley.pdf
94. Noblit G, Hare R. Meta-Ethnography: synthesizing qualitative evidence. Newbury Park: Sage, 1988.
95. Birch S. Making the problem fit the solution: evidence-based decision making and 'Dolly'economics. In: Donaldson C, Mugford M, Vale L (eds) Evidence-Based Health Economics: from effectiveness to efficiency in systematic review. London: BMJ Books, 2002.
96. Birch S, Gafni A. Evidence-based health economics. Answers in search of questions? In: Kristiansen I, Mooney G (eds) Evidence-Based Medicine in Its Place. London: Routledge, 2002.
97. Boaz A, Ashby D, Young K. Systematic Reviews: what have they got to offer evidence based policy and practice? (Working Paper No. 2). London: ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice, 2002.
98. Glass GV, McGaw B, Smith ML. Meta-Analysis in Social Research. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1981.
99. Cronbach LJ. Designing Evaluations of Education and Social Programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1983.
100. Cronbach LJ. Functional evaluation design for a world of political accommodation. In: Shadish W, Cook TD, Leviton L (eds) Foundations of Program Evaluation. Newbury Park: Sage Publications, 1991.
101. Campbell DT, Russo MJ. Social Experimentation. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1999.
102. Oakley A. Experiments in Knowing: gender and method in the social sciences. Oxford: Polity Books, 2000.
103. Berwick DM. The science of improvement. Journal of the American Medical Association 2008; 229(10): 1182-1184.
104. Byng R, Norman I, Redfern S. Using realistic evaluation to evaluate a practice level intervention to improve primary health care for patients with long-term mental illness. Evaluation 2005; 11(1): 69-93.
105. Judge K, Mackenzie M. Theory-based approaches to evaluation: complex community-based initiatives. In: Mackenbach J, Bakker M (eds) Reducing Inequalities in Health: a European perspective. London: Routledge, 2002.
106. Anderson R. New MRC guidance on evaluating complex interventions: clarifying what interventions work by researching how and why they are effective. British Medical Journal 2008; 337(a1937): 944-945.
107. Pawson R. Nothing as practical as good theory. Evaluation 2003; 9(4): 471-490.
108. Konnerup M, Kongsted H. There is More to Seeing than Meets the Eye: observational studies, research synthesis and the social sciences (Contingency and Dissent in Science Technical Report 06/09). London: Centre for the Philosophy of Natural and Social Science, 2009.