Towards meaningful outcome measures for health economic evaluations in skin cancer : A decision matrix to guide transparent outcome selection in skin cancer health economic evaluations, supporting more informed decision-making.

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Annick Meertens, Lieven Annemans, Floor Verstraete, Isabelle Hoorens, Nick Verhaeghe
{"title":"Towards meaningful outcome measures for health economic evaluations in skin cancer : A decision matrix to guide transparent outcome selection in skin cancer health economic evaluations, supporting more informed decision-making.","authors":"Annick Meertens, Lieven Annemans, Floor Verstraete, Isabelle Hoorens, Nick Verhaeghe","doi":"10.1186/s12962-026-00855-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Healthcare systems are facing increasing resource constraints, so robust health economic evaluations (HEE) are essential to inform evidence-based decision-making, also in skin cancer care. Selecting incomplete or inappropriate outcomes in HEE may under- or overestimate benefits for patients, misrepresent trade-offs between costs and outcomes and lead to suboptimal resource allocation. This comment discusses key considerations in selecting outcome measures for skin cancer HEE and proposes a conceptual decision matrix to guide meaningful outcome selection. Informed by methodological guidance and a targeted literature search, outcome domains applied in skin cancer HEE were categorized into quality of life based outcomes and clinical outcomes (hard and intermediate endpoints). These were assessed against predefined criteria covering measurement properties (e.g. sensitivity & validity), model integration (e.g. economic translatability & compatibility), decision relevance (e.g. interpretability for health technology assessment (HTA) & patient burden) and feasibility (e.g. data availability & generalizability). A qualitative scoring approach was used to make trade-offs between outcomes explicit. Generic quality of life outcomes facilitate comparability and interpretability for HTA but may lack sensitivity. Disease-specific outcomes better reflect patient-relevant domains but raise challenges regarding comparability. Intermediate clinical outcomes align closely with intervention mechanisms but require additional assumptions. The decision matrix highlights that no single outcome measure performs well across all criteria. Overall, the findings support selecting complementary outcome measures that reflect the intervention mechanisms, patient- preferences and burden and decision context. The proposed decision matrix provides a structured framework to support transparent and meaningful outcome selection.</p>","PeriodicalId":47054,"journal":{"name":"Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13689267/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12962-026-00855-5","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Healthcare systems are facing increasing resource constraints, so robust health economic evaluations (HEE) are essential to inform evidence-based decision-making, also in skin cancer care. Selecting incomplete or inappropriate outcomes in HEE may under- or overestimate benefits for patients, misrepresent trade-offs between costs and outcomes and lead to suboptimal resource allocation. This comment discusses key considerations in selecting outcome measures for skin cancer HEE and proposes a conceptual decision matrix to guide meaningful outcome selection. Informed by methodological guidance and a targeted literature search, outcome domains applied in skin cancer HEE were categorized into quality of life based outcomes and clinical outcomes (hard and intermediate endpoints). These were assessed against predefined criteria covering measurement properties (e.g. sensitivity & validity), model integration (e.g. economic translatability & compatibility), decision relevance (e.g. interpretability for health technology assessment (HTA) & patient burden) and feasibility (e.g. data availability & generalizability). A qualitative scoring approach was used to make trade-offs between outcomes explicit. Generic quality of life outcomes facilitate comparability and interpretability for HTA but may lack sensitivity. Disease-specific outcomes better reflect patient-relevant domains but raise challenges regarding comparability. Intermediate clinical outcomes align closely with intervention mechanisms but require additional assumptions. The decision matrix highlights that no single outcome measure performs well across all criteria. Overall, the findings support selecting complementary outcome measures that reflect the intervention mechanisms, patient- preferences and burden and decision context. The proposed decision matrix provides a structured framework to support transparent and meaningful outcome selection.

为皮肤癌健康经济评估制定有意义的结果措施:一个决策矩阵,用于指导皮肤癌健康经济评估中透明的结果选择,支持更明智的决策。
卫生保健系统正面临越来越多的资源限制,因此强有力的卫生经济评估(HEE)对于为基于证据的决策提供信息至关重要,在皮肤癌护理中也是如此。在HEE中选择不完整或不适当的结局可能会低估或高估患者的收益,错误地反映成本和结果之间的权衡,并导致资源分配不理想。这篇评论讨论了选择皮肤癌HEE结果测量的关键考虑因素,并提出了一个概念性决策矩阵来指导有意义的结果选择。通过方法学指导和有针对性的文献检索,将应用于皮肤癌HEE的结果域分为基于生活质量的结果和临床结果(硬终点和中间终点)。这些指标是根据预定义的标准进行评估的,这些标准包括测量特性(例如敏感性和有效性)、模型整合(例如经济可翻译性和兼容性)、决策相关性(例如卫生技术评估(HTA)和患者负担的可解释性)和可行性(例如数据可用性和概括性)。采用定性评分方法来明确结果之间的权衡。一般生活质量结果有助于HTA的可比性和可解释性,但可能缺乏敏感性。疾病特异性结果更好地反映了患者相关领域,但对可比性提出了挑战。中期临床结果与干预机制密切相关,但需要额外的假设。决策矩阵强调,没有一个单一的结果测量在所有标准中都表现良好。总的来说,研究结果支持选择反映干预机制、患者偏好、负担和决策背景的补充结果测量。所提出的决策矩阵提供了一个结构化的框架,以支持透明和有意义的结果选择。
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
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
4.30%
发文量
59
审稿时长
34 weeks
期刊介绍: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation is an Open Access, peer-reviewed, online journal that considers manuscripts on all aspects of cost-effectiveness analysis, including conceptual or methodological work, economic evaluations, and policy analysis related to resource allocation at a national or international level. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation is aimed at health economists, health services researchers, and policy-makers with an interest in enhancing the flow and transfer of knowledge relating to efficiency in the health sector. Manuscripts are encouraged from researchers based in low- and middle-income countries, with a view to increasing the international economic evidence base for health.
×
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
小红书