IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i4p1171-d319873.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Evaluations Informed Exclusively by Real World Data: A Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Elizabeth Parody-Rúa

    (Teaching, Research & Innovation Unit, Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu–Institut de Recerca Sant Joan de Déu, 08830 Barcelona, Spain
    Primary Care Prevention and Health Promotion Network (redIAPP), 08007 Barcelona, Spain)

  • Maria Rubio-Valera

    (Teaching, Research & Innovation Unit, Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu–Institut de Recerca Sant Joan de Déu, 08830 Barcelona, Spain
    CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), 28029 Madrid, Spain)

  • César Guevara-Cuellar

    (Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Icesi, 760030 Cali, Colombia)

  • Ainhoa Gómez-Lumbreras

    (Institut Universitari d’Investigació en Atenció Primària Jordi Gol (IDIAPJGol), 08007 Barcelona, Spain
    Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), Spain
    Health Science School, Universitat de Girona, 17071 Girona, Spain)

  • Marc Casajuana-Closas

    (Institut Universitari d’Investigació en Atenció Primària Jordi Gol (IDIAPJGol), 08007 Barcelona, Spain
    Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), Spain)

  • Cristina Carbonell-Duacastella

    (Teaching, Research & Innovation Unit, Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu–Institut de Recerca Sant Joan de Déu, 08830 Barcelona, Spain
    CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), 28029 Madrid, Spain)

  • Ignacio Aznar-Lou

    (Teaching, Research & Innovation Unit, Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu–Institut de Recerca Sant Joan de Déu, 08830 Barcelona, Spain
    CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), 28029 Madrid, Spain)

Abstract

Economic evaluations using Real World Data (RWD) has been increasing in the very recent years, however, this source of information has several advantages and limitations. The aim of this review was to assess the quality of full economic evaluations (EE) developed using RWD. A systematic review was carried out through articles from the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Included were studies that employed RWD for both costs and effectiveness. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Of the 14,011 studies identified, 93 were included. Roughly half of the studies were carried out in a hospital setting. The most frequently assessed illnesses were neoplasms while the most evaluated interventions were pharmacological. The main source of costs and effects of RWD were information systems. The most frequent clinical outcome was survival. Some 47% of studies met at least 80% of CHEERS criteria. Studies were conducted with samples of 100–1000 patients or more, were randomized, and those that reported bias controls were those that fulfilled most CHEERS criteria. In conclusion, fewer than half the studies met 80% of the CHEERS checklist criteria.

Suggested Citation

  • Elizabeth Parody-Rúa & Maria Rubio-Valera & César Guevara-Cuellar & Ainhoa Gómez-Lumbreras & Marc Casajuana-Closas & Cristina Carbonell-Duacastella & Ignacio Aznar-Lou, 2020. "Economic Evaluations Informed Exclusively by Real World Data: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-18, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:4:p:1171-:d:319873
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/4/1171/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/4/1171/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Don Husereau & Michael Drummond & Stavros Petrou & Chris Carswell & David Moher & Dan Greenberg & Federico Augustovski & Andrew Briggs & Josephine Mauskopf & Elizabeth Loder, 2013. "Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) Statement," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 361-367, May.
    2. Hui-Min Hsieh & Song-Mao Gu & Shyi-Jang Shin & Hao-Yun Kao & Yi-Chieh Lin & Herng-Chia Chiu, 2015. "Cost-Effectiveness of a Diabetes Pay-For-Performance Program in Diabetes Patients with Multiple Chronic Conditions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-15, July.
    3. Fadia Shaya & Ian Breunig & Brian Seal & C. Mullins & Viktor Chirikov & Nader Hanna, 2014. "Comparative and Cost Effectiveness of Treatment Modalities for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in SEER-Medicare," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 63-74, January.
    4. Päivi Kolu & Jani Raitanen & Pekka Rissanen & Riitta Luoto, 2013. "Cost-Effectiveness of Lifestyle Counselling as Primary Prevention of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Findings from a Cluster-Randomised Trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(2), pages 1-12, February.
    5. Noémi Kreif & Richard Grieve & M. Zia Sadique, 2013. "Statistical Methods For Cost‐Effectiveness Analyses That Use Observational Data: A Critical Appraisal Tool And Review Of Current Practice," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(4), pages 486-500, April.
    6. Hla-Hla Thein & Yao Qiao & Ahmad Zaheen & Nathaniel Jembere & Gonzalo Sapisochin & Kelvin K W Chan & Eric M Yoshida & Craig C Earle, 2017. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with non-curative or palliative intent for hepatocellular carcinoma in the real-world setting," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-20, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Najmiatul Fitria & Antoinette D. I. Asselt & Maarten J. Postma, 2019. "Cost-effectiveness of controlling gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(3), pages 407-417, April.
    2. Carmen Selva-Sevilla & Elena Conde-Montero & Manuel Gerónimo-Pardo, 2020. "Bayesian Regression Model for a Cost-Utility and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Comparing Punch Grafting Versus Usual Care for the Treatment of Chronic Wounds," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-21, May.
    3. Deidda, Manuela & Geue, Claudia & Kreif, Noemi & Dundas, Ruth & McIntosh, Emma, 2019. "A framework for conducting economic evaluations alongside natural experiments," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 220(C), pages 353-361.
    4. Carmen Selva-Sevilla & F Dámaso Fernández-Ginés & Manuel Cortiñas-Sáenz & Manuel Gerónimo-Pardo, 2021. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of domiciliary topical sevoflurane for painful leg ulcers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-18, September.
    5. Giovanna Elisa Calabrò & Sara Boccalini & Donatella Panatto & Caterina Rizzo & Maria Luisa Di Pietro & Fasika Molla Abreha & Marco Ajelli & Daniela Amicizia & Angela Bechini & Irene Giacchetta & Piero, 2022. "The New Quadrivalent Adjuvanted Influenza Vaccine for the Italian Elderly: A Health Technology Assessment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-14, March.
    6. Noemi Kreif & Richard Grieve & Rosalba Radice & Zia Sadique & Roland Ramsahai & Jasjeet S. Sekhon, 2012. "Methods for Estimating Subgroup Effects in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses That Use Observational Data," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(6), pages 750-763, November.
    7. Saha, Sanjib & Gerdtham, Ulf-G. & Toresson, Håkan & Minthon, Lennart & Jarl, Johan, 2018. "Economic Evaluation of Interventions for Screening of Dementia," Working Papers 2018:20, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    8. Clarke, Lorcan, 2020. "An introduction to economic studies, health emergencies, and COVID-19," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 105051, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Qi Cao & Erik Buskens & Hans L. Hillege & Tiny Jaarsma & Maarten Postma & Douwe Postmus, 2019. "Stratified treatment recommendation or one-size-fits-all? A health economic insight based on graphical exploration," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(3), pages 475-482, April.
    10. Thomas Grochtdreis & Hans-Helmut König & Alexander Dobruschkin & Gunhild von Amsberg & Judith Dams, 2018. "Cost-effectiveness analyses and cost analyses in castration-resistant prostate cancer: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-25, December.
    11. Wendy Hens & Dirk Vissers & Nick Verhaeghe & Jan Gielen & Luc Van Gaal & Jan Taeymans, 2021. "Unsupervised Exercise Training Was Not Found to Improve the Metabolic Health or Phenotype over a 6-Month Dietary Intervention: A Randomised Controlled Trial with an Embedded Economic Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-13, July.
    12. Kim Edmunds & Penny Reeves & Paul Scuffham & Daniel A. Galvão & Robert U. Newton & Mark Jones & Nigel Spry & Dennis R. Taaffe & David Joseph & Suzanne K. Chambers & Haitham Tuffaha, 2020. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Supervised Exercise Training in Men with Prostate Cancer Previously Treated with Radiation Therapy and Androgen-Deprivation Therapy," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 18(5), pages 727-737, October.
    13. Andrew Gawron & Dustin French & John Pandolfino & Colin Howden, 2014. "Economic Evaluations of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Medical Management," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(8), pages 745-758, August.
    14. Saha, Sanjib & Gerdtham, Ulf-G. & Toresson, Håkan & Minthon, Lennart & Jarl, Johan, 2018. "Economic Evaluation of Nonpharmacological Interventions for Dementia Patients and their Caregivers - A Systematic Literature Review," Working Papers 2018:10, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    15. Frank G. Sandmann & Julie V. Robotham & Sarah R. Deeny & W. John Edmunds & Mark Jit, 2018. "Estimating the opportunity costs of bed‐days," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(3), pages 592-605, March.
    16. Jesse Elliott & Sasha Katwyk & Bláthnaid McCoy & Tammy Clifford & Beth K. Potter & Becky Skidmore & George A. Wells & Doug Coyle, 2019. "Decision Models for Assessing the Cost Effectiveness of Treatments for Pediatric Drug-Resistant Epilepsy: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(10), pages 1261-1276, October.
    17. Wei Zhang & Aslam Anis, 2014. "Health-Related Productivity Loss: NICE to Recognize Soon, Good to Discuss Now," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(5), pages 425-427, May.
    18. Katherine Edwards & Natasha Jones & Julia Newton & Charlie Foster & Andrew Judge & Kate Jackson & Nigel K. Arden & Rafael Pinedo-Villanueva, 2017. "The cost-effectiveness of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review of the characteristics and methodological quality of published literature," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 1-23, December.
    19. Don Husereau & Michael Drummond & Stavros Petrou & Dan Greenberg & Josephine Mauskopf & Federico Augustovski & Andrew Briggs & David Moher & Elizabeth Loder & Chris Carswell, 2015. "Reply to Roberts et al.: CHEERS is Sufficient for Reporting Cost-Benefit Analysis, but May Require Further Elaboration," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(5), pages 535-536, May.
    20. Nina van der Vliet & Anita W.M. Suijkerbuijk & Adriana T. de Blaeij & G. Ardine de Wit & Paul F. van Gils & Brigit A.M. Staatsen & Rob Maas & Johan J. Polder, 2020. "Ranking Preventive Interventions from Different Policy Domains: What Are the Most Cost-Effective Ways to Improve Public Health?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-24, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:4:p:1171-:d:319873. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.