Literature DB >> 35007499

Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) statement: updated reporting guidance for health economic evaluations.

Don Husereau1,2, Michael Drummond3, Federico Augustovski4,5,6, Esther de Bekker-Grob7, Andrew H Briggs8, Chris Carswell9, Lisa Caulley10,11,12, Nathorn Chaiyakunapruk13, Dan Greenberg14, Elizabeth Loder15,16, Josephine Mauskopf17, C Daniel Mullins18, Stavros Petrou19, Raoh-Fang Pwu20, Sophie Staniszewska21.   

Abstract

Health economic evaluations are comparative analyses of alternative courses of action in terms of their costs and consequences. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement, published in 2013, was created to ensure health economic evaluations are identifiable, interpretable, and useful for decision making. It was intended as guidance to help authors report accurately which health interventions were being compared and in what context, how the evaluation was undertaken, what the findings were, and other details that may aid readers and reviewers in interpretation and use of the study. The new CHEERS 2022 statement replaces previous CHEERS reporting guidance. It reflects the need for guidance that can be more easily applied to all types of health economic evaluation, new methods and developments in the field, as well as the increased role of stakeholder involvement including patients and the public. It is also broadly applicable to any form of intervention intended to improve the health of individuals or the population, whether simple or complex, and without regard to context (such as health care, public health, education, social care, etc.). This summary article presents the new CHEERS 2022 28-item checklist and recommendations for each item. The CHEERS 2022 statement is primarily intended for researchers reporting economic evaluations for peer-reviewed journals, as well as the peer reviewers and editors assessing them for publication. However, we anticipate familiarity with reporting requirements will be useful for analysts when planning studies. It may also be useful for health technology assessment bodies seeking guidance on reporting, as there is an increasing emphasis on transparency in decision making.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cost-benefit analysis; Economic evaluation; Guidance; Methods; Reporting

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35007499     DOI: 10.1017/S0266462321001732

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care        ISSN: 0266-4623            Impact factor:   2.188


  5 in total

1.  Ridiculously good writing: How to write like a pro and publish like a boss.

Authors:  Susan C Modesitt; Laura J Havrilesky; Rebecca A Previs; J Alejandro Rauh-Hain; J Michael Straughn; Jamie N Bakkum-Gamez; Katherine C Fuh; David E Cohn
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol Rep       Date:  2022-06-10

Review 2.  A systematic review of economic evaluations of pharmacological treatments for adults with chronic migraine.

Authors:  Saval Khanal; Martin Underwood; Seyran Naghdi; Anna Brown; Callum Duncan; Manjit Matharu; Hema Mistry
Journal:  J Headache Pain       Date:  2022-09-16       Impact factor: 8.588

3.  Scaling up target regimens for tuberculosis preventive treatment in Brazil and South Africa: An analysis of costs and cost-effectiveness.

Authors:  Ntwali Placide Nsengiyumva; Jonathon R Campbell; Olivia Oxlade; Juan F Vesga; Christian Lienhardt; Anete Trajman; Dennis Falzon; Saskia Den Boon; Nimalan Arinaminpathy; Kevin Schwartzman
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2022-06-13       Impact factor: 11.613

Review 4.  Systematic Literature Review of the Use of Productivity Losses/Gains in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Immune-Mediated Disorders.

Authors:  Akira Yuasa; Naohiro Yonemoto; Kazumasa Kamei; Toshiaki Murofushi; Michael LoPresti; Ankush Taneja; Jake Horgan; Shunya Ikeda
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2022-10-07       Impact factor: 4.070

Review 5.  Economic evaluation of CPD activities for healthcare professionals: A scoping review.

Authors:  Witold Orlik; Giuseppe Aleo; Thomas Kearns; Jonathan Briody; Jane Wray; Paul Mahon; Mario Gazić; Normela Radoš; Cristina García Vivar; Manuel Lillo Crespo; Catherine Fitzgerald
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2022-04-29       Impact factor: 7.647

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.