Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS) statement

<p>Economic evaluations of health interventions pose a particular challenge for reporting. There is also a need to consolidate and update existing guidelines and promote their use in a user friendly manner. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement is an attempt to consolidate and update previous health economic evaluation guidelines efforts into one current, useful reporting guidance. The primary audiences for the CHEERS statement are researchers reporting economic evaluations and the editors and peer reviewers assessing them for publication.</p> <p>The need for new reporting guidance was identified by a survey of medical editors. A list of possible items based on a systematic review was created. A two round, modified Delphi panel consisting of representatives from academia, clinical practice, industry, government, and the editorial community was conducted. Out of 44 candidate items, 24 items and accompanying recommendations were developed. The recommendations are contained in a user friendly, 24 item checklist. A copy of the statement, accompanying checklist, and this report can be found on the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluations Publication Guidelines Task Force website (www.ispor.org/TaskForces/EconomicPubGuidelines.asp).</p> <p>We hope CHEERS will lead to better reporting, and ultimately, better health decisions. To facilitate dissemination and uptake, the CHEERS statement is being co-published across 10 health economics and medical journals. We encourage other journals and groups, to endorse CHEERS. The author team plans to review the checklist for an update in five years.</p&gt

A Systematic Evaluation of the Impact of STRICTA and CONSORT Recommendations on Quality of Reporting for Acupuncture Trials

Background: We investigated whether there had been an improvement in quality of reporting for randomised controlled trials of acupuncture since the publication of the STRICTA and CONSORT statements. We conducted a before-and-after study, comparing ratings for quality of reporting following the publication of both STRICTA and CONSORT recommendations. Methodology and Principal Findings: Ninety peer reviewed journal articles reporting the results of acupuncture trials were selected at random from a wider sample frame of 266 papers. Papers published in three distinct time periods (1994–1995, 1999–2000 and 2004–2005) were compared. Assessment criteria were developed directly from CONSORT and STRICTA checklists. Papers were independently assessed for quality of reporting by two assessors, one of whom was blind to information which could have introduced systematic bias (e.g. date of publication). We detected a statistically significant increase in the reporting of CONSORT items for papers published in each time period measured. We did not, however, find a difference between the number of STRICTA items reported in journal articles published before and 3 to 4 years following the introduction of STRICTA recommendations. Conclusions and Significance: The results of this study suggest that general standards of reporting for acupuncture trials have significantly improved since the introduction of the CONSORT statement in 1996, but that quality in reporting detail

Mapping Health Literacy Research in the European Union: A Bibliometric Analysis

Background: To examine and compare the research productivity on selected fields related to health literacy of the curren

Estimating the Capacity for ART Provision in Tanzania with the Use of Data on Staff Productivity and Patient Losses

BACKGROUND: International targets for access to antiretroviral therapy (ART) have over-estimated the capacity of health systems in low-income countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. The WHO target for number on treatment by end 2005 for Tanzania was 10 times higher than actually achieved. The target of the national Care and Treatment Plan (CTP) was also not reached. We aimed at estimating the capacity for ART provision and created five scenarios for ART production given existing resource limitations. METHODS: A situation analysis including scrutiny of staff factors, such as available data on staff and patient factors including access to ART and patient losses, made us conclude that the lack of clinical staff is the main limiting factor for ART scale-up, assuming that sufficient drugs and supplies are provided by donors. We created a simple formula to estimate the number of patients on ART based on availability and productivity of clinical staff, time needed to initiate vs maintain a patient on ART and patient losses using five different scenarios with varying levels of these parameters. FINDINGS: Our scenario assuming medium productivity (40% higher than that observed in 2002) and medium loss of patients (20% in addition to 15% first-year mortality) coincides with the actual reported number of patients initiated on ART up to 2008, but is considerably below the national CTP target of 90% coverage for 2009, corresponding to 420,000 on ART and 710,000 life-years saved (LY's). Our analysis suggests that a coverage of 40% or 175,000 on treatment and 350,000 LY's saved is more achievable. CONCLUSION: A comparison of our scenario estimations and actual output 2006-2008 indicates that a simple user-friendly dynamic model can estimate the capacity for ART scale-up in resource-poor settings based on identification of a limiting staff factor and information on availability of this staff and patient losses. Thus, it is possible to set more achievable targets

Cost-Effectiveness of “Golden Mustard” for Treating Vitamin A Deficiency in India

BACKGROUND: Vitamin A deficiency (VAD) is an important nutritional problem in India, resulting in an increased risk of severe morbidity and mortality. Periodic, high-dose vitamin A supplementation is the WHO-recommended method to prevent VAD, since a single dose can compensate for reduced dietary intake or increased need over a period of several months. However, in India only 34 percent of targeted children currently receive the two doses per year, and new strategies are urgently needed. METHODOLOGY: Recent advancements in biotechnology permit alternative strategies for increasing the vitamin A content of common foods. Mustard (Brassica juncea), which is consumed widely in the form of oil by VAD populations, can be genetically modified to express high levels of beta-carotene, a precursor to vitamin A. Using estimates for consumption, we compare predicted costs and benefits of genetically modified (GM) fortification of mustard seed with high-dose vitamin A supplementation and industrial fortification of mustard oil during processing to alleviate VAD by calculating the avertable health burden in terms of disability-adjusted life years (DALY). PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We found that all three interventions potentially avert significant numbers of DALYs and deaths. Expanding vitamin A supplementation to all areas was the least costly intervention, at $23-$50 per DALY averted and $1,000-$6,100 per death averted, though cost-effectiveness varied with prevailing health subcenter coverage. GM fortification could avert 5 million-6 million more DALYs and 8,000-46,000 more deaths, mainly because it would benefit the entire population and not just children. However, the costs associated with GM fortification were nearly five times those of supplementation. Industrial fortification was dominated by both GM fortification and supplementation. The cost-effectiveness ratio of each intervention decreased with the prevalence of VAD and was sensitive to the efficacy rate of averted mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Although supplementation is the least costly intervention, our findings also indicate that GM fortification could reduce the VAD disease burden to a substantially greater degree because of its wider reach. Given the difficulties in expanding supplementation to areas without health subcenters, GM fortification of mustard seed is an attractive alternative, and further exploration of this technology is warranted

Post Genome-Wide Association Studies of Novel Genes Associated with Type 2 Diabetes Show Gene-Gene Interaction and High Predictive Value

Recently, several Genome Wide Association (GWA) studies in populations of European descent have identified and validated novel single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), highly associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Our aims were to validate these markers in other European and non-European populations, then to assess their combined effect in a large French study comparing T2D and normal glucose tolerant (NGT) individuals. rs7903146 SNP, were combined (8.68-fold for the 14% of French individuals carrying 18 to 30 risk alleles with an allelic OR of 1.24). With an area under the ROC curve of 0.86, only 15 novel loci were necessary to discriminate French individuals susceptible to develop T2D. strongly associate with T2D in French individuals, and mostly in populations of Central European descent but not in Moroccan subjects. Genes expressed in the pancreas interact together and their combined effect dramatically increases the risk for T2D, opening avenues for the development of genetic prediction tests

DCD liver transplantation: is donor age an issue?

INTRODUCTION: There has been a growing awareness of the need for rigorously and transparent reported health research, to ensure the reproducibility of studies by future researchers. Health economic evaluations, the comparative analysis of alternative interventions in terms of their costs and consequences, have been promoted as an important tool to inform decision-making. The objective of this study will be to investigate the extent to which articles of economic evaluations of healthcare interventions indexed in MEDLINE incorporate research practices that promote transparency, openness and reproducibility. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is the study protocol for a cross-sectional comparative analysis. We registered the study protocol within the Open Science Framework (osf.io/gzaxr). We will evaluate a random sample of 600 cost-effectiveness analysis publications, a specific form of health economic evaluations, indexed in MEDLINE during 2012 (n=200), 2019 (n=200) and 2022 (n=200). We will include published papers written in English reporting an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in terms of costs per life years gained, quality-adjusted life years and/or disability-adjusted life years. Screening and selection of articles will be conducted by at least two researchers. Reproducible research practices, openness and transparency in each article will be extracted using a standardised data extraction form by multiple researchers, with a 33% random sample (n=200) extracted in duplicate. Information on general, methodological and reproducibility items will be reported, stratified by year, citation of the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement and journal. Risk ratios with 95% CIs will be calculated to represent changes in reporting between 2012-2019 and 2019-2022. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Due to the nature of the proposed study, no ethical approval will be required. All data will be deposited in a cross-disciplinary public repository. It is anticipated the study findings could be relevant to a variety of audiences. Study findings will be disseminated at scientific conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals