Challenges of Systematic Reviews of Economic Evaluations : A Review of Recent Reviews and an Obesity Case Study

Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the REBALANCE team for commenting on the REBALANCE systematic review used as a case-study. We also wish to thank Karin Gøthe Áslakksdóttir for contributing to the rapid review of reviews. Funding: The authors received no direct funding for this study and/or preparation of this manuscript. However, the REBALANCE study was funded by the National Institute for Health Research HTA programme, project number 15/09/04.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Stability of Willingness to Pay : does time and treatment allocation in a Randomised Controlled Trial influence willingness to pay?

Peer reviewe

UK general population willingness to pay for scale and polish, and detailed and personalized oral hygiene advice

Acknowledgements iQuaD was funded by the Health Technology Assessment Programme of the National Institute for Health Research, Current Controlled Trials number ISRCTN56465715. The Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates funds HERU. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors only and not those of the funding bodies.Peer reviewedPostprin

A Systematic Review of the evidence for Non-surgical weight management for adults with severe obesity : What is cost effective and what are the implications for the Design of health Services?

Acknowledgements The REBALANCE team: REBALANCE Project management team were Elisabet Jacobsen (Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK), Dwayne Boyers (Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK), David Cooper (Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK), Lise Retat (UK Health Forum +), Paul Aveyard (Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Oxford University, Oxford, UK), Fiona Stewart (Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK), Graeme MacLennan (Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK), Laura Webber (UK Health Forum +) Emily Corbould (UK Health Forum), Benshuai Xu (UK Health Forum), Abbygail Jaccard (UK Health Forum), Bonnie Boyle (Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK), Eilidh Duncan (Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK), Michal Shimonovich (Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK), Cynthia Fraser (Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK) and Lara Kemp (Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK), Zoe Skea (Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, UK), Clare Robertson (Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, UK), Magaly Aceves-Martins (Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, UK), Alison Avenell (Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, UK), Marijn de Bruin (Radboud University Medical Center, IQ Healthcare, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, The Netherlands). We thank the REBALANCE Advisory Group for all their advice and support during this project: Margaret Watson, Lorna Van Lierop, Richard Clarke, Jennifer Logue, Laura Stewart, Richard Welbourn, Jamie Blackshaw and Su Sethi. +Current address HealthLumen, London. Funding This is a substantial update to the systematic review of economic evaluations that was conducted as part of our REBALANCE project. The REBALANCE project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme (Project number: 15/09/04). See the HTA Programme website for further project information. The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Health, or the funders that provide institutional support for the authors of that report. The Health Services Research Unit and Health Economics Research Unit are core funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorate.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Eltrombopag for the treatment of chronic idiopathic (immune) thrombocytopenic purpura : A Single Technology Appraisal

Evidence Review Group (ERG) final report for the National Institute for Health and Clinical ExcellencePublisher PD

Current and projected financial burden of emergency general surgery for adults in Scotland’s single payer healthcare system : a cost analysis of hospital admissions

No funding received, including none from National Institutes of Health, Wellcome Trust or Howard Hughes Medical Institute. The authors report no conflicts of interest. Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal’s Web site (www.annalsofsurgery.com).Peer reviewedPostprintPostprin

Process evaluation for the FEeding Support Team (FEST) randomised controlled feasibility trial of proactive and reactive telephone support for breastfeeding women living in disadvantaged areas

OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility, acceptability and fidelity of a feeding team intervention with an embedded randomised controlled trial of team-initiated (proactive) and woman-initiated (reactive) telephone support after hospital discharge. DESIGN: Participatory approach to the design and implementation of a pilot trial embedded within a before-and-after study, with mixed-method process evaluation. SETTING: A postnatal ward in Scotland. SAMPLE: Women initiating breast feeding and living in disadvantaged areas. METHODS: Quantitative data: telephone call log and workload diaries. Qualitative data: interviews with women (n=40) with follow-up (n=11) and staff (n=17); ward observations 2 weeks before and after the intervention; recorded telephone calls (n=16) and steering group meetings (n=9); trial case notes (n=69); open question in a telephone interview (n=372). The Framework approach to analysis was applied to mixed-method data. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Quantitative: telephone call characteristics (number, frequency, duration); workload activity. Qualitative: experiences and perspectives of women and staff. RESULTS: A median of eight proactive calls per woman (n=35) with a median duration of 5 min occurred in the 14 days following hospital discharge. Only one of 34 control women initiated a call to the feeding team, with women undervaluing their own needs compared to others, and breast feeding as a reason to call. Proactive calls providing continuity of care increased women's confidence and were highly valued. Data demonstrated intervention fidelity for woman-centred care; however, observing an entire breast feed was not well implemented due to short hospital stays, ward routines and staff-team-woman communication issues. Staff pragmatically recognised that dedicated feeding teams help meet women's breastfeeding support needs in the context of overstretched and variable postnatal services. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing and integrating the FEeding Support Team (FEST) trial within routine postnatal care was feasible and acceptable to women and staff from a research and practice perspective and shows promise for addressing health inequalities

Pit and fissure sealants versus fluoride varnishes for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth of children and adolescents

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

UK general population’s Willingness To Pay for dental check-ups

Funding statement The project was funded by the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme (project number: 06/35/99). The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Health or the funders that provide institutional support for the authors of this report. The Health Economics Research Unit at the University of Aberdeen are funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates. Acknowledgements We would like to acknowledge and thank all of the respondents to our survey who took the time to share their opinions and preferences with us. We are grateful to all members of the INTERVAL study team who provided input, advice, and comments on draft versions of the surveyPeer reviewe

Cost-effectiveness of point-of-care C-Reactive Protein test compared to current clinical practice as an intervention to improve antibiotic prescription in malaria-negative patients in Afghanistan

Acknowledgments The paper was initially developed as part of an MSc dissertation by the lead author at the University of Aberdeen. The authors acknowledge the inputs from researchers into the primary data collection in 2009–2012 and CEA study for the introduction of Malaria RDTs in Afghanistan; not all of these authors met criterion for authorship on this paper.Peer reviewedPublisher PD