Assessment of the quality and trend of reporting of health economic evaluation research in India

ABSTRACT

Objectives: This study was conducted to assess the reporting quality of health economic evaluation studies using Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement along with an analysis of their trend in India.

Methods: Following ethical review exemption, PubMed and Google scholar were searched for Indian studies published in 5 years (2014–2019). Keywords used were cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit, cost-utility, and cost-minimization analysis, economic evaluation, and India. CHEERS statement was used to assess the reporting quality and trend was studied using variables like a published year, type of analysis, therapy area, intervention. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Results: Of the 39 studies analyzed, 17 scored less than 18 (represents 75% compliance) with a minimum score of 9 and a maximum of 23. The reporting quality was deficient with respect to heterogeneity characterization (25 studies), discount rate (18 studies), model choice, and assumptions (18 studies). Cost – effectiveness was the most common PE analysis (27 studies). The most commonly studied therapy area was infectious disorders (10) followed by oncology (5), and the commonest intervention was drugs (22).

Conclusion: Inadequacy in reporting quality of health economic evaluation studies is evident. The trend revealed cost-effectiveness to be the most commonly performed type of analysis.

Expert Opinion: Health economic evaluation research has gained considerable importance in healthcare decision making. Reporting quality is critical to enable efficient interpretation of health economic evaluation research. These studies have many elements, each of which have a significant impact on the conduct and outcome of the study. Hence, it is advisable to refer to any of the available guidelines [eg. CHEERS checklist] while preparing the manuscript so as to ensure all crucial elements of the study have been reported.

KEYWORDS:

• Pharmacoeconomics
• cheers checklist
• cost-effectiveness
• cost-minimization
• cost-utility

Declaration of interest

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

Reviewers disclosure

Peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial relationships or otherwise to disclose.

Author contributions

Both the authors have contributed to the design and conceptualization, data entry and analysis as well as drafting and approval of the final draft of the manuscript.

Additional information

Funding

This paper was not funded.