دورية أكاديمية
Assessment of Extent and Quality of Pharmacoeconomic Studies in India Using Quality of Health Economic Studies Score: A Targeted Literature Review.
| العنوان: | Assessment of Extent and Quality of Pharmacoeconomic Studies in India Using Quality of Health Economic Studies Score: A Targeted Literature Review. |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Patel N; EVERSANA, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. Electronic address: dr.neelkiranpatel@gmail.com., Yanamala S; EVERSANA, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh, India., Rai M; EVERSANA, Singapore. |
| المصدر: | Value in health regional issues [Value Health Reg Issues] 2024 May; Vol. 41, pp. 41-47. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Jan 17. |
| نوع المنشور: | Journal Article; Review |
| اللغة: | English |
| بيانات الدورية: | Publisher: Elsevier Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 101592642 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 2212-1102 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 22121099 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Value Health Reg Issues Subsets: MEDLINE |
| أسماء مطبوعة: | Original Publication: New York : Elsevier |
| مواضيع طبية MeSH: | Economics, Pharmaceutical*/standards , Cost-Benefit Analysis*/methods , Cost-Benefit Analysis*/standards, India ; Humans |
| مستخلص: | Objectives: We assessed the quality of pharmacoeconomic studies conducted in India to report key areas of focus on the findings from the reviewed studies. Methods: A targeted literature review was conducted using well-defined search strategy in PubMed to identify economic studies conducted in India from May 2017 to April 2022. Only economic evaluation studies were included, whereas trial-based cost analyses were excluded. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies tool, which comprised 16 evaluation criteria related to objectives, source, funding, perspective, subgroup analysis, scales, and economic modeling related parameters. Based on scores (100 points), studies were rated as good (≥75), fair (50-74), and poor (≤49) quality. Results: Search strategy provided 888 studies; 95 of these were economic studies, and 74 were included in the analysis. These 74 studies included budget impact analysis (n = 4), burden of illness (n = 8), cost-benefit analysis (n = 5), cost-consequences analysis (n = 1), cost-effectiveness analysis (n = 55), and cost-utility analysis (n = 1). The average quality score of studies was 64.08. Of the studies, 15 studies were rated as "good," 51 "fair," and 8 "poor." It was observed that primary outcome measures, stating negative outcomes, reporting bias, and implementing statistical and sensitivity analysis significantly affected the quality score. Conclusions: Most of the health economic studies conducted in India are of fair quality, and there is a need for standardization of guidelines and increase in number of Indian peer-reviewed health economics journals. A collaborative effort from pharma companies, policy makers, education experts, curriculum planners, and medical faculty is needed to promote quality economic studies. Competing Interests: Author Disclosures Author disclosure forms can be accessed in the Supplemental Material section. (Copyright © 2023 International Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.) |
| فهرسة مساهمة: | Keywords: Quality of Health Economic Studies tool; pharmacoeconomic analysis; quality assessment; reporting bias; study quality |
| تواريخ الأحداث: | Date Created: 20240118 Date Completed: 20240508 Latest Revision: 20240604 |
| رمز التحديث: | 20240604 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.vhri.2023.11.013 |
| PMID: | 38237328 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | MEDLINE |
Full Text Finder | تدمد: | 2212-1102 |
|---|---|
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.vhri.2023.11.013 |