Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) Statement: Updated Reporting Guidance for Health Economic Evaluations

References

• Pitt C, Goodman C, Hanson K. Economic evaluation in global perspective: a bibliometric analysis of the recent literature. Health Econ 2016;25(Suppl 1):9–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neumann PJ, Thorat T, Shi J, Saret CJ, Cohen JT. The changing face of the cost-utility literature, 1990-2012. Value Health 2015;18:271–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panzer AD, Emerson JG, D’Cruz B, et al. Growth and capacity for cost-effectiveness analysis in Africa. Health Econ 2020;29:945–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, et al; ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines-CHEERS Good Reporting Practices Task Force. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS)--explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force. Value Health 2013;16:231–50.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caulley L, Catalá-López F, Whelan J, et al. Reporting guidelines of health research studies are frequently used inappropriately. J Clin Epidemiol 2020;122:87–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emerson J, Panzer A, Cohen JT, et al. Adherence to the iDSI reference case among published cost-per-DALY averted studies. PLoS One 2019;14:e0205633.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Task Force on Principles for Economic Analysis of Health Care Technology. Economic analysis of health care technology. A report on principles. Ann Intern Med 1995;123:61–70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gold MR. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Oxford University Press, 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Drummond MF, Jefferson TO; The BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. BMJ 1996;313:275–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siegel JE, Weinstein MC, Russell LB, Gold MR; Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. JAMA 1996;276:1339–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nuijten MJ, Pronk MH, Brorens MJA, et al. Reporting format for economic evaluation. Part II: Focus on modelling studies. Pharmacoeconomics 1998;14:259–68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vintzileos AM, Beazoglou T. Design, execution, interpretation, and reporting of economic evaluation studies in obstetrics. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;191:1070–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drummond M, Manca A, Sculpher M. Increasing the generalizability of economic evaluations: recommendations for the design, analysis, and reporting of studies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2005;21:165–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramsey SD, Willke RJ, Glick H, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials II-An ISPOR Good Research Practices Task Force report. Value Health 2015;18:161–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goetghebeur MM, Wagner M, Khoury H, Levitt RJ, Erickson LJ, Rindress D. Evidence and Value: Impact on DEcisionMaking--the EVIDEM framework and potential applications. BMC Health Serv Res 2008;8:270.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis JC, Robertson MC, Comans T, Scuffham PA. Guidelines for conducting and reporting economic evaluation of fall prevention strategies. Osteoporos Int 2011;22:2449–59.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrou S, Gray A. Economic evaluation alongside randomised controlled trials: design, conduct, analysis, and reporting. BMJ 2011;342:d1548.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrou S, Gray A. Economic evaluation using decision analytical modelling: design, conduct, analysis, and reporting. BMJ 2011;342:d1766.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanghera S, Frew E, Roberts T. Adapting the CHEERS Statement for reporting cost-benefit analysis. Pharmacoeconomics 2015;33:533–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker DG, Wilson RF, Sharma R, et al. Best practices for conducting economic evaluations in health care: a systematic review of quality assessment tools. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2012. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK114545/
   Google Scholar
• Jüni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, Egger M. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA 1999;282:1054–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanders GD, Neumann PJ, Basu A, et al. Recommendations for conduct, methodological practices, and reporting of cost-effectiveness analyses: second panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA 2016;316:1093–103.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CADTH.ca. Guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies: Canada. 2015. https://www.cadth.ca/about-cadth/how-we-do-it/methods-and-guidelines/guidelines-for-the-economic-evaluation-of-health-technologies-canada.
   Google Scholar
• EUnetHTA European Network for Health Technology Assessment. Practical considerations when critically assessing economic evaluations. Guidance document. 2021. https://eunethta.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/EUnetHTA-JA3WP6B2-5-Guidance-Critical-Assessment-EE_v1-0.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Thorn J, Ridyard C, Hughes D, et al. Health economics analysis plans: Where are we now? Value Health 2016;19:A397. .
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunlop WCN, Mason N, Kenworthy J, Akehurst RL. Benefits, challenges and potential strategies of open source health economic models. Pharmacoeconomics 2017;35:125–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jansen JP, Incerti D, Linthicum MT. Developing open-source models for the US health system: practical experiences and challenges to date with the open-source value project. Pharmacoeconomics 2019;37:1313–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith R, Schneider P. Making health economic models Shiny: A tutorial. Wellcome Open Res 2020;5:69.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• ISPOR. Open source models. https://www.ispor.org/member-groups/special-interest-groups/open-source-models.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen JT, Neumann PJ, Wong JB. A call for open-source cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Intern Med 2017;167:432–3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO. WHO guide for standardization of economic evaluations of immunization programmes. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-IVB-19.10.
   Google Scholar
• Mauskopf J, Standaert B, Connolly MP, et al. Economic analysis of vaccination programs: An ISPOR Good Practices for Outcomes Research Task Force Report. Value Health 2018;21:1133–49.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkinson T, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, et al. The International Decision Support Initiative reference case for economic evaluation: an aid to thought. Value Health 2016;19:921–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cookson R, Drummond M, Weatherly H. Explicit incorporation of equity considerations into economic evaluation of public health interventions. Health Econ Policy Law 2009;4:231–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cookson R, Griffin S, Norheim OF, Culyer AJ, Chalkidou K. Distributional cost-effectiveness analysis comes of age. Value Health 2021;24:118–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lorgelly PK. Patient and public involvement in health economics and outcomes research. Patient 2021;14:379–80.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ryan M, Moran PS, Harrington P, et al. Contribution of stakeholder engagement to the impact of a health technology assessment: an Irish case study. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2017;33:424–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hawton A, Boddy K, Kandiyali R, Tatnell L, Gibson A, Goodwin E. Involving patients in health economics research: “The PACTS Principles”. Patient 2021;14:429–34.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Husereau D, Drummond M, Augustovski F, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) Explanation and Elaboration: A report of the ISPOR CHEERS II Good Practices Task Force. Value Health 2022;
   Google Scholar
• Malone DC, Ramsey SD, Patrick DL, et al. Criteria and Process for Initiating and Developing an ISPOR Good Practices Task Force Report. Value Health 2020;23:409–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moher D, Schulz KF, Simera I, Altman DG. Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines. PLoS Med 2010;7:e1000217.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Staniszewska S, Brett J, Simera I, et al. GRIPP2 reporting checklists: tools to improve reporting of patient and public involvement in research. BMJ 2017;358:j3453.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drummond M. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 4th ed. Oxford University Press, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Sullivan SD, Mauskopf JA, Augustovski F, et al. Budget impact analysis-principles of good practice: report of the ISPOR 2012 Budget Impact Analysis Good Practice II Task Force. Value Health 2014;17:5–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crown W, Buyukkaramikli N, Thokala P, et al. Constrained optimization methods in health services research-an introduction: Report 1 of the ISPOR Optimization Methods Emerging Good Practices Task Force. Value Health 2017;20:310–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bond K, Stiffell R, Ollendorf DA. Principles for deliberative processes in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2020;1–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ISPOR. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). https://www.ispor.org/CHEERS.
   Google Scholar
• Altman DG, Simera I. A history of the evolution of guidelines for reporting medical research: the long road to the EQUATOR Network. J R Soc Med 2016;109:67–77.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Catalá-López F, Caulley L, Ridao M, et al. Reproducible research practices, openness and transparency in health economic evaluations: study protocol for a cross-sectional comparative analysis. BMJ Open 2020;10:e034463.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sperber AD. Translation and validation of study instruments for cross-cultural research. Gastroenterology 2004;126(Suppl 1):S124–S8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar