Economic evidence

Shemilt, Ian; Aluko, Patricia; Graybill, Erin; Craig, Dawn; Henderson, Catherine; Drummond, Michael; Wilson, Edward CF; Robalino, Shannon; Vale, Luke

doi:10.1002/9781119536604.ch20

Cited by 31 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Flow diagram according to PRISMA Statement (Shemilt et al, 2019) presenting results of searches performed on September 4, 2019 and up‐dated September 2, 2020 and study selection…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The data on the prediction method/model of each study considered to be important was the description and the predictive performance of the methods/model. For the economic evaluation data as proposed by Shemilt et al (2019) was collected when available on (a) the analytic framework and type of economic evaluation, (b) the analytic perspective (whose costs and benefits a decision maker views as important) and time horizon, (c) main cost items includes in the analysis and (d) the setting (i.e., country, health care system), currency and price year. Data from included studies were tabulated by one reviewer and checked by the other reviewers, who read the studies in parallel to verify the accuracy of collected data and to ensure that relevant data was included.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To ensure a systematic approach, the SR was structured in the following steps: (a) formulating the review questions, (b) formulating eligibility criteria, (c) identification and selection of studies, (d) collection of data and appraisal of included studies and (e) synthesis and interpretation. PRISMA statement (Shemilt et al, 2019) was implemented, and the SR was registered in PROS-PERO (International prospective register of systematic reviews; PROSPERO, 2020) as CRD42020149763.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

There is a paucity of economic evaluations of prediction methods of caries and periodontitis—A systematic review

Fransson

Davidson

Rohlin

et al. 2021

Clinical & Exp Dental Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Direct cost for methods of prediction also named risk assessment in dentistry may be negligible compared with the cost of extensive constructions. On the other hand, as risk assessment is performed daily and for several patients in general dental practice, the costs may be considerable. The objective was to summarize evidence in studies of economic evaluation of prognostic prediction multivariable models and methods of caries and periodontitis and to identify knowledge gaps (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020149763). Material and methods Four electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, NHS Economic Evaluation Database) and reference lists of included studies were searched. Titles and abstracts were screened by two reviewers in parallel. Full‐text studies reporting resources used, costs and cost‐effectiveness of prediction models and methods were selected and critically appraised using a protocol based on items from the CHEERS checklist for economic evaluations and the CHARMS checklist for evaluation of prediction studies. Results From 38 selected studies, six studies on prediction fulfilled the eligibility criteria, four on caries and two on periodontitis. As the economic evaluations differed in method and perspective among the studies, the results could not be generalized. Our systematic review revealed methodological shortcomings regarding the description of predictive models and methods, and particularly of the economic evaluation. Conclusions The systematic review highlighted a paucity of economic evaluations regarding methods or multivariable models for prediction of caries and periodontitis. Our results indicate that what we currently practice using models and methods to predict caries and periodontitis lacks evidence regarding cost‐effectiveness.

show abstract

“…Flow diagram according to PRISMA Statement (Shemilt et al, 2019) presenting results of searches performed on September 4, 2019 and up‐dated September 2, 2020 and study selection…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

There is a paucity of economic evaluations of prediction methods of caries and periodontitis—A systematic review

Fransson

Davidson

Rohlin

et al. 2021

Clinical & Exp Dental Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…35 This methodology draws on recommendations for conducting umbrella reviews and appraising economic evidence. 36 , 37 , 38 From now on, in this article, we will refer to those publications that met our inclusion criteria as “included reviews,” to publications that did not meet our inclusion criteria as “candidate reviews,” and to studies synthesized by included reviews as “primary research” or “included studies.” We also refer to “reviews of reviews,” that are publications, like this one, that compiled and synthesized published evidence reviews. Supplementary File 1 further describes the processes of identifying and synthesizing reviews.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic Aspects of Delivering Primary Care Services: An Evidence Synthesis to Inform Policy and Research Priorities

Clarke

Anderson

et al. 2021

Milbank Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 2018 Declaration of Astana reemphasized the importance of primary health care and its role in achieving universal health coverage. While there is a large amount of literature on the economic aspects of delivering primary care services, there is a need for more comprehensive overviews of this evidence. In this article, we offer such an overview. Evidence suggests that there are several strategies involving coverage, financing, service delivery, and governance arrangements which can, if implemented, have positive economic impacts on the delivery of primary care services. These include arrangements such as worker task‐shifting and telemedicine. The implementation of any such arrangements, based on positive economic evidence, should carefully account for potential impacts on overall health care access and quality. There are many opportunities for further research, with notable gaps in evidence on the impacts of increasing primary care funding or the overall supply of primary care services. Context The 2018 Declaration of Astana reemphasized the importance of primary health care and its role in achieving universal health coverage. To strengthen primary health care, policymakers need guidance on how to allocate resources in a manner that maximizes its economic benefits. Methods We collated and synthesized published systematic reviews of evidence on the economic aspects of different models of delivering primary care services. Building on previous efforts, we adapted existing taxonomies of primary care components to classify our results according to four categories: coverage, financing, service delivery, and governance. Findings We identified and classified 109 reviews that met our inclusion criteria according to our taxonomy of primary care components: coverage, financing, service delivery, and governance arrangements. A significant body of evidence suggests that several specific primary care arrangements, such as health workers' task shifting and telemedicine, can have positive economic impacts (such as lower overall health care costs). Notably absent were reviews on the impact of increasing primary care funding or the overall supply of primary care services. Conclusions There is a great opportunity for further research to systematically examine the broader economic impacts of investing in primary care services. Despite progress over the last decade, significant evidence gaps on the economic implications of different models of primary care services remain, which could help inform the basis of future research efforts.

show abstract

“…To indicate whether an intervention might be judged favourably (or unfavourably) from an economic perspective, 66 we will use the Dominance Ranking Matrix to classify the interventions into one of three options. 67 Strong dominance for the intervention will be selected when the incremental cost–effectiveness measure shows the intervention as: (1) more effective and less costly than the comparator; or (2) effective and less costly; or (3) equal cost and more effective.…”

Section: Data Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Rehabilitative management of back pain in children: protocol for a mixed studies systematic review

Cancelliere

Wong

et al. 2020

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionLittle is known about effective, efficient and acceptable management of back pain in children. A comprehensive and updated evidence synthesis can help to inform clinical practice.ObjectiveTo inform clinical practice, we aim to conduct a systematic review of the literature and synthesise the evidence regarding effective, cost–effective and safe rehabilitation interventions for children with back pain to improve their functioning and other health outcomes.Methods and analysisWe will search MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, the Index to Chiropractic Literature, the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials and EconLit for primary studies published from inception in all languages. We will include quantitative studies (randomised controlled trials, cohort and case–control studies), qualitative studies, mixed-methods studies and full economic evaluations. To augment our search of the bibliographic electronic databases, we will search reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and consult with content experts. We will assess the risk of bias using appropriate critical appraisal tools. We will extract data about study and participant characteristics, intervention type and comparators, context and setting, outcomes, themes and methodological quality assessment. We will use a sequential approach at the review level to integrate data from the quantitative, qualitative and economic evidence syntheses.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required. We will disseminate findings through activities, including (1) presentations in national and international conferences; (2) meetings with national and international decision makers; (3) publications in peer-reviewed journals and (4) posts on organisational websites and social media.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019135009.

show abstract

Economic evidence

Cited by 31 publications

References 10 publications

There is a paucity of economic evaluations of prediction methods of caries and periodontitis—A systematic review

There is a paucity of economic evaluations of prediction methods of caries and periodontitis—A systematic review

Economic Aspects of Delivering Primary Care Services: An Evidence Synthesis to Inform Policy and Research Priorities

Rehabilitative management of back pain in children: protocol for a mixed studies systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About