A review of heath economic evaluation practice in the Netherlands: are we moving forward?

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Health Economics Policy and Law Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2023-06-06 DOI:10.1017/S1744133123000087
Andrea Gabrio
{"title":"A review of heath economic evaluation practice in the Netherlands: are we moving forward?","authors":"Andrea Gabrio","doi":"10.1017/S1744133123000087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Economic evaluations have been increasingly conducted in different countries to aid national decision-making bodies in resource allocation problems based on current and prospective evidence on costs and effects data for a set of competing health care interventions. In 2016, the Dutch National Health Care Institute issued new guidelines that aggregated and updated previous recommendations on key elements for conducting economic evaluation. However, the impact on standard practice after the introduction of the guidelines in terms of design, methodology and reporting choices, is still uncertain. To assess this impact, we examine and compare key analysis components of economic evaluations conducted in the Netherlands before (2010-2015) and after (2016-2020) the introduction of the recent guidelines. We specifically focus on two aspects of the analysis that are crucial in determining the plausibility of the results: statistical methodology and missing data handling. Our review shows how, over the last period, many components of economic evaluations have changed in accordance with the new recommendations towards more transparent and advanced analytic approaches. However, potential limitations are identified in terms of the use of less advanced statistical software together with rarely satisfactory information to support the choice of missing data methods, especially in sensitivity analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":46836,"journal":{"name":"Health Economics Policy and Law","volume":" ","pages":"174-191"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Economics Policy and Law","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744133123000087","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Economic evaluations have been increasingly conducted in different countries to aid national decision-making bodies in resource allocation problems based on current and prospective evidence on costs and effects data for a set of competing health care interventions. In 2016, the Dutch National Health Care Institute issued new guidelines that aggregated and updated previous recommendations on key elements for conducting economic evaluation. However, the impact on standard practice after the introduction of the guidelines in terms of design, methodology and reporting choices, is still uncertain. To assess this impact, we examine and compare key analysis components of economic evaluations conducted in the Netherlands before (2010-2015) and after (2016-2020) the introduction of the recent guidelines. We specifically focus on two aspects of the analysis that are crucial in determining the plausibility of the results: statistical methodology and missing data handling. Our review shows how, over the last period, many components of economic evaluations have changed in accordance with the new recommendations towards more transparent and advanced analytic approaches. However, potential limitations are identified in terms of the use of less advanced statistical software together with rarely satisfactory information to support the choice of missing data methods, especially in sensitivity analysis.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
荷兰医疗经济评估实践回顾:我们是否在前进?
各国越来越多地开展经济评价,以帮助国家决策机构根据一组相互竞争的医疗干预措施的成本和效果数据的当前和前瞻性证据,解决资源分配问题。2016 年,荷兰国家医疗保健研究所发布了新指南,汇总并更新了之前关于开展经济评估关键要素的建议。然而,指南出台后在设计、方法和报告选择方面对标准实践的影响仍不确定。为了评估这种影响,我们研究并比较了荷兰在引入最新指南之前(2010-2015 年)和之后(2016-2020 年)进行的经济评估的关键分析要素。我们特别关注分析的两个方面,这两个方面对于确定结果的可信度至关重要:统计方法和缺失数据处理。我们的回顾表明,在过去的一段时间里,经济评价的许多内容已根据新的建议发生了变化,变得更加透明和先进。然而,我们也发现了一些潜在的局限性,如使用不那么先进的统计软件,以及很少有令人满意的信息来支持缺失数据方法的选择,特别是在敏感性分析中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Economics Policy and Law
Health Economics Policy and Law HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
期刊介绍: International trends highlight the confluence of economics, politics and legal considerations in the health policy process. Health Economics, Policy and Law serves as a forum for scholarship on health policy issues from these perspectives, and is of use to academics, policy makers and health care managers and professionals. HEPL is international in scope, publishes both theoretical and applied work, and contains articles on all aspects of health policy. Considerable emphasis is placed on rigorous conceptual development and analysis, and on the presentation of empirical evidence that is relevant to the policy process.
期刊最新文献
How should medicines reimbursement work? The views of Spanish experts. Success and failure in establishing national physician databases: a comparison between Canada and Israel. Implications of the fair processes for financing UHC report for development assistance: reflections and an application of the decision-making principles to PEPFAR. A systematic literature review of real-world evidence (RWE) on post-market assessment of medical devices. Response to critics of Open and Inclusive: Fair Processes for Financing Universal Health Coverage.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1