Analysis of the Current Status and Characteristics of Health Economics Reporting in Clinical Practice Guidelines for 2021-2023.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Xin Xing, Guohua Zhang, Weize Kong, Liping Guo, Xiuxia Li, Zhipeng Wei, Yongbin Lu, Howard White, Yaolong Chen, Kehu Yang
{"title":"Analysis of the Current Status and Characteristics of Health Economics Reporting in Clinical Practice Guidelines for 2021-2023.","authors":"Xin Xing, Guohua Zhang, Weize Kong, Liping Guo, Xiuxia Li, Zhipeng Wei, Yongbin Lu, Howard White, Yaolong Chen, Kehu Yang","doi":"10.1111/jebm.70062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>While prior investigations into the reporting of health economics (HE) have predominantly focused on guideline analyses at singular institutional or national levels, this study extends its scope to encompass diverse guidance documents issued transnationally across multiple institutions. Specifically, we evaluated the reporting of HE evidence in international clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and expert consensus statements published between 2021 and 2023. The findings aim to inform the future revisions and development of such documents.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic PubMed search identified relevant CPGs and expert consensus statements within a specified period. Two independent researchers screened the literature, extracted economic evidence integrated into these documents, and employed descriptive analysis to summarize the reporting characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 8931 screened publications, 3119 (34.9%) reported HE evidence. Among these 3119 publications, 237 (7.6%) incorporated HE evidence in formulating recommendations, 220 (7.1%) utilized HE evidence for evidence grading, and 2581 (82.8%) referenced HE evidence in explanatory notes accompanying the recommendations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Current CPGs and expert consensus statements exhibit low rates of HE evidence reporting, indicating that most international guideline developers have overlooked their applications. HE evidence-through cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses-can optimize medical resource allocation, support clinicians in patient-centered economic decision-making, and enhance health outcomes. Future guideline development should prioritize HE evidence integration to advance the scientific rigor and clinical applicability of the recommendations.</p>","PeriodicalId":16090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"e70062"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jebm.70062","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: While prior investigations into the reporting of health economics (HE) have predominantly focused on guideline analyses at singular institutional or national levels, this study extends its scope to encompass diverse guidance documents issued transnationally across multiple institutions. Specifically, we evaluated the reporting of HE evidence in international clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and expert consensus statements published between 2021 and 2023. The findings aim to inform the future revisions and development of such documents.

Methods: A systematic PubMed search identified relevant CPGs and expert consensus statements within a specified period. Two independent researchers screened the literature, extracted economic evidence integrated into these documents, and employed descriptive analysis to summarize the reporting characteristics.

Results: Of the 8931 screened publications, 3119 (34.9%) reported HE evidence. Among these 3119 publications, 237 (7.6%) incorporated HE evidence in formulating recommendations, 220 (7.1%) utilized HE evidence for evidence grading, and 2581 (82.8%) referenced HE evidence in explanatory notes accompanying the recommendations.

Conclusions: Current CPGs and expert consensus statements exhibit low rates of HE evidence reporting, indicating that most international guideline developers have overlooked their applications. HE evidence-through cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses-can optimize medical resource allocation, support clinicians in patient-centered economic decision-making, and enhance health outcomes. Future guideline development should prioritize HE evidence integration to advance the scientific rigor and clinical applicability of the recommendations.

2021-2023年临床实践指南中卫生经济学报告的现状及特点分析
目的:虽然先前对卫生经济学(HE)报告的调查主要集中在单一机构或国家层面的指导分析,但本研究将其范围扩大到包括跨多个机构跨国发布的各种指导文件。具体来说,我们评估了国际临床实践指南(cpg)和专家共识声明中关于HE证据的报告,这些声明发表于2021年至2023年之间。调查结果旨在为今后修订和发展这类文件提供信息。方法:通过系统的PubMed检索,确定相关cpg和专家共识声明。两位独立研究人员筛选文献,提取整合到这些文献中的经济证据,并采用描述性分析来总结报告特征。结果:在8931篇筛选的出版物中,3119篇(34.9%)报道了HE证据。在这3119篇论文中,237篇(7.6%)将HE证据纳入建议,220篇(7.1%)使用HE证据进行证据分级,2581篇(82.8%)在建议的解释性注释中引用了HE证据。结论:目前CPGs和专家共识声明的HE证据报告率较低,表明大多数国际指南制定者忽视了它们的应用。通过成本效益和成本效用分析,HE证据可以优化医疗资源分配,支持临床医生以患者为中心的经济决策,并提高健康结果。未来指南的制定应优先考虑HE证据整合,以提高建议的科学严谨性和临床适用性。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine
Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
1.40%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: The Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine (EMB) is an esteemed international healthcare and medical decision-making journal, dedicated to publishing groundbreaking research outcomes in evidence-based decision-making, research, practice, and education. Serving as the official English-language journal of the Cochrane China Centre and West China Hospital of Sichuan University, we eagerly welcome editorials, commentaries, and systematic reviews encompassing various topics such as clinical trials, policy, drug and patient safety, education, and knowledge translation.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信