Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Feb 12;17(4):1171.
doi: 10.3390/ijerph17041171.

Economic Evaluations Informed Exclusively by Real World Data: A Systematic Review

Elizabeth Parody-Rúa  1   2 , Maria Rubio-Valera  1   3 , César Guevara-Cuellar  4 , Ainhoa Gómez-Lumbreras  5   6   7 , Marc Casajuana-Closas  5   6 , Cristina Carbonell-Duacastella  1   3 , Ignacio Aznar-Lou  1   3
Affiliations

Economic Evaluations Informed Exclusively by Real World Data: A Systematic Review

Elizabeth Parody-Rúa et al. Int J Environ Res Public Health. .

Abstract

Economic evaluations using Real World Data (RWD) has been increasing in the very recent years, however, this source of information has several advantages and limitations. The aim of this review was to assess the quality of full economic evaluations (EE) developed using RWD. A systematic review was carried out through articles from the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Included were studies that employed RWD for both costs and effectiveness. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Of the 14,011 studies identified, 93 were included. Roughly half of the studies were carried out in a hospital setting. The most frequently assessed illnesses were neoplasms while the most evaluated interventions were pharmacological. The main source of costs and effects of RWD were information systems. The most frequent clinical outcome was survival. Some 47% of studies met at least 80% of CHEERS criteria. Studies were conducted with samples of 100-1000 patients or more, were randomized, and those that reported bias controls were those that fulfilled most CHEERS criteria. In conclusion, fewer than half the studies met 80% of the CHEERS checklist criteria.

Keywords: economic evaluation; electronic health records; real world data; real world evidence; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest related to this systematic review.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of paper selection.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Quality assessment according CHEERS check list. Items 15 (Choice of model) and 16 (assumptions) only apply to mathematical models and were not scored. NA: Not apply
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Drummond M.F., McGuire A. Economic Evaluation in Health Care: Merging Theory with Practice. Oxford University Press; Oxford, UK: 2005.
    1. Bowrin K., Briere J.B., Levy P. Cost-effectiveness analyses using real-world data: An overview of the literature. J. Med. Econ. 2019;22:545–553. doi: 10.1080/13696998.2019.1588737. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Terkola R., Antonanzas F., Postma M. Economic evaluation of personalized medicine: A call for real-world data. Eur. J. Health Econ. 2017;18:1065–1067. doi: 10.1007/s10198-017-0890-x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Makady A., de Boer A., Hillege H., Klungel O., Goettsch W. What Is Real-World Data? A Review of Definitions Based on Literature and Stakeholder Interviews. Value Health. 2017;20:858–865. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.03.008. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Garrison L.P., Neumann P.J., Erickson P., Marshall D., Mullins C.D. Using real-world data for coverage and payment decisions: The ISPOR real-world data task force report. Value Health. 2007;10:326–335. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00186.x. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources