Evaluating the conduct and application of health utility studies: a review of critical appraisal tools and reporting checklists

Affiliations

¹ Department of Health Research Methodology, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
² Department of Pharmacy Systems, Outcomes and Policy, College of Pharmacy, The University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
³ Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
⁴ Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
⁵ Acaster Lloyd Consulting Ltd, London, UK.
⁶ Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.
⁷ Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, Canada.
⁸ School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
⁹ School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
¹⁰ Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
¹¹ Department of Medicine, Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
¹² St Joseph's Healthcare, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
¹³ Department of Health Research Methodology, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. fengxie@mcmaster.ca.

PMID: 33839968
DOI: 10.1007/s10198-021-01286-0

Review

Evaluating the conduct and application of health utility studies: a review of critical appraisal tools and reporting checklists

Michael J Zoratti et al. Eur J Health Econ. 2021 Jul.

. 2021 Jul;22(5):723-733.

doi: 10.1007/s10198-021-01286-0. Epub 2021 Apr 11.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ Department of Health Research Methodology, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
² Department of Pharmacy Systems, Outcomes and Policy, College of Pharmacy, The University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
³ Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
⁴ Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
⁵ Acaster Lloyd Consulting Ltd, London, UK.
⁶ Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.
⁷ Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, Canada.
⁸ School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
⁹ School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
¹⁰ Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
¹¹ Department of Medicine, Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
¹² St Joseph's Healthcare, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
¹³ Department of Health Research Methodology, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. fengxie@mcmaster.ca.

PMID: 33839968
DOI: 10.1007/s10198-021-01286-0

Abstract

Background: Published health utility studies are increasingly cited in cost-utility analyses to inform reimbursement decision-making. However, there is limited guidance for investigators looking to systematically evaluate the methodological quality of health utility studies or their applicability to decision contexts.

Objective: To describe how health utility concepts are reflected in tools intended for use with the health economic literature, particularly with respect to the evaluation of methodological quality and context applicability.

Methods: We reviewed the critical appraisal and reporting tools described in a 2012 report published by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), supplemented with a keyword search of MEDLINE and EMBASE, to identify existing tools which include health utility constructs. From these tools, a list of relevant items was compiled and grouped into domain categories based on the methodological or applicability aspect they were directed toward.

Results: Of the 24 tools we identified, 12 contained items relevant to the evaluation of health utilities. Sixty-five items were considered relevant to the evaluation of quality, while 44 were relevant to the evaluation of applicability. Items were arranged into four domains: health state descriptions; selection and description of respondents; elicitation and measurement methods; and other considerations.

Conclusion: As key inputs to cost-utility analyses, health utilities have the potential to significantly impact estimates of cost-effectiveness. Existing tools contain only general items related to the conduct or use of health utility studies. There is a need to develop tools that systematically evaluate the methodological quality and applicability of health utility studies.

Keywords: Checklist; Cost utility analysis; Health utility; Methodology.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

1. Klarman, H.E., Francis, J.O.S., Rosenthal, G.D.: Cost Effectiveness Analysis Applied to the Treatment of Chronic Renal Disease. Med. Care 6(1), 48–54 (1968) - DOI
1. Bremner, K.E., Chong, C.A., Tomlinson, G., Alibhai, S.M., Krahn, M.D.: A review and meta-analysis of prostate cancer utilities. Med. Decis. Making 27(3), 288–298 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989x07300604 - DOI - PubMed
1. Sturza, J.: A review and meta-analysis of utility values for lung cancer. Med. Decis. Making 30(6), 685–693 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989x10369004 - DOI - PubMed
1. Paracha, N., Thuresson, P.O., Moreno, S.G., MacGilchrist, K.S.: Health state utility values in locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer by treatment line: a systematic review. Expert Rev. Pharmacoecon. Outcomes Res. 16(5), 549–559 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2016.1222907 - DOI - PubMed
1. Peasgood, T., Ward, S.E., Brazier, J.: Health-state utility values in breast cancer. Expert Rev. Pharmacoecon. Outcomes Res. 10(5), 553–566 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1586/erp.10.65 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Actions

MeSH terms

Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources
- Springer
Other Literature Sources
- scite Smart Citations
Research Materials
- NCI CPTC Antibody Characterization Program

Save citation to file

Email citation

Add to Collections

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search

Create a file for external citation management software

Your RSS Feed

Evaluating the conduct and application of health utility studies: a review of critical appraisal tools and reporting checklists

Affiliations

Evaluating the conduct and application of health utility studies: a review of critical appraisal tools and reporting checklists

Authors

Affiliations

Abstract

References

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources

Other Literature Sources

Research Materials