Johanna Lister, Suzy Paisley, Christopher Carroll, Paul Tappenden
{"title":"为健康经济模型检索效用值的其他搜索方法的经验测试。","authors":"Johanna Lister, Suzy Paisley, Christopher Carroll, Paul Tappenden","doi":"10.1007/s40273-024-01414-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objective of this study is to compare different information retrieval methods that can be used to identify utility inputs for health economic models.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The usual practice of using systematic review methods was compared with two alternatives (iterative searching and rapid review), using a health technology assessment (HTA) case study in ulcerative colitis (UC). We analysed whether there were differences in the utility values identified when using the alternative search methods. Success was evaluated in terms of time, burden and relevance of identified information. The identified utility values were tested in an executable health economic model developed for UC, and the model results were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The usual practice of using systematic review search approaches identified the most publications but was also the least precise method and took longest to complete. The inclusion of data from the different search methods in the model did not lead to different conclusions across search methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this case study, usual practice was less efficient and resulted in the same health economic model conclusions as the alternative search methods. Further case studies are required to examine whether this conclusion might be generalisable.</p>","PeriodicalId":19807,"journal":{"name":"PharmacoEconomics","volume":" ","pages":"1255-1266"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Empirical Testing of Alternative Search Methods to Retrieve Utility Values for Health Economic Modelling.\",\"authors\":\"Johanna Lister, Suzy Paisley, Christopher Carroll, Paul Tappenden\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40273-024-01414-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objective of this study is to compare different information retrieval methods that can be used to identify utility inputs for health economic models.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The usual practice of using systematic review methods was compared with two alternatives (iterative searching and rapid review), using a health technology assessment (HTA) case study in ulcerative colitis (UC). We analysed whether there were differences in the utility values identified when using the alternative search methods. Success was evaluated in terms of time, burden and relevance of identified information. The identified utility values were tested in an executable health economic model developed for UC, and the model results were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The usual practice of using systematic review search approaches identified the most publications but was also the least precise method and took longest to complete. The inclusion of data from the different search methods in the model did not lead to different conclusions across search methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this case study, usual practice was less efficient and resulted in the same health economic model conclusions as the alternative search methods. Further case studies are required to examine whether this conclusion might be generalisable.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19807,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PharmacoEconomics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1255-1266\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PharmacoEconomics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-024-01414-7\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PharmacoEconomics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-024-01414-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Empirical Testing of Alternative Search Methods to Retrieve Utility Values for Health Economic Modelling.
Objectives: The objective of this study is to compare different information retrieval methods that can be used to identify utility inputs for health economic models.
Methods: The usual practice of using systematic review methods was compared with two alternatives (iterative searching and rapid review), using a health technology assessment (HTA) case study in ulcerative colitis (UC). We analysed whether there were differences in the utility values identified when using the alternative search methods. Success was evaluated in terms of time, burden and relevance of identified information. The identified utility values were tested in an executable health economic model developed for UC, and the model results were compared.
Results: The usual practice of using systematic review search approaches identified the most publications but was also the least precise method and took longest to complete. The inclusion of data from the different search methods in the model did not lead to different conclusions across search methods.
Conclusions: In this case study, usual practice was less efficient and resulted in the same health economic model conclusions as the alternative search methods. Further case studies are required to examine whether this conclusion might be generalisable.
期刊介绍:
PharmacoEconomics is the benchmark journal for peer-reviewed, authoritative and practical articles on the application of pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life assessment to optimum drug therapy and health outcomes. An invaluable source of applied pharmacoeconomic original research and educational material for the healthcare decision maker.
PharmacoEconomics is dedicated to the clear communication of complex pharmacoeconomic issues related to patient care and drug utilization.
PharmacoEconomics offers a range of additional features designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. Each article is accompanied by a Key Points summary, giving a time-efficient overview of the content to a wide readership. Articles may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand the scientific content and overall implications of the article.