Challenges in synthesising cost-effectiveness estimates

Systematic Reviews

卷:9

Jamie Elvidge¹  Gemma E. Shields² 

[1] Centre for Health Technology Evaluation, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence;

[2] Manchester Centre for Health Economics, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research, and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester;

关键词: Meta-analysis;    Systematic review;    Cost-effectiveness analysis;    Economic evaluation;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s13643-020-01536-x

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

Abstract Economic evaluations help decision-makers faced with tough decisions on how to allocate resources. Systematic reviews of economic evaluations are useful as they allow readers to assess whether interventions have been demonstrated to be cost effective, the uncertainty in the evidence base, and key limitations or gaps in the evidence base. The synthesis of systematic reviews of economic evaluations commonly takes a narrative approach whereas a meta-analysis is common step for reviews of clinical evidence (e.g. effectiveness or adverse event outcomes). As they are common objectives in other reviews, readers may query why a synthesis has not been attempted for economic outcomes. However, a meta-analysis of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, costs, or health benefits (including quality-adjusted life years) is fraught with issues largely due to heterogeneity across study designs and methods and further practical challenges. Therefore, meta-analysis is rarely feasible or robust. This commentary outlines these issues, supported by examples from the literature, to support researchers and reviewers considering systematic review of economic evidence.

【 授权许可】

Unknown