ASCOT和ICECAP在决策中的作用:NICE社会关怀和公共卫生指南综述

IF 6 2区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Zhixin Zhang, Tuba Saygın Avşar, Sophie Cooper, Jeremy Dietz
{"title":"ASCOT和ICECAP在决策中的作用:NICE社会关怀和公共卫生指南综述","authors":"Zhixin Zhang, Tuba Saygın Avşar, Sophie Cooper, Jeremy Dietz","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2025.08.021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>When the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) assesses whether interventions in health and social care offer value for money, where possible, it considers health effects expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). NICE's preferred measure of health-related quality of life is the EQ-5D. For non-health effects, NICE cites ASCOT and ICECAP as possible outcomes. To date, their use in NICE guidelines has not been reviewed.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aims of this study were to 1) review how ASCOT and ICECAP have been used in NICE social care and public health guidelines and 2) contextualize the review via expert interviews.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>NICE social care and public health guidelines published before 26/08/2025 were reviewed, and information on the use of ASCOT and ICECAP was extracted. Five experts were interviewed to contextualize review findings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the eligible guidelines, ASCOT appeared as an outcome in 4% and ICECAP in 1%. Neither measure significantly impacted committee's decision-making. Interview findings were grouped into two themes: (1) reasons behind the limited use of these measures (with 3 subthemes: conceptual, system-wide issues and implementation challenges); and (2) ongoing developments and future opportunities.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ASCOT and ICECAP appeared infrequently in the NICE guidelines reviewed, and when used, their impact on committee decision-making was limited-either due to trial-specific limitations or reliance on other forms of evidence. Experts suggested several barriers to the use of these measures, and although these barriers are not insurmountable, it is unclear if such measures may appear more in future NICE social care and public health guidelines.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"ASCOT and ICECAP in decision-making: A review of NICE social care and public health guidelines.\",\"authors\":\"Zhixin Zhang, Tuba Saygın Avşar, Sophie Cooper, Jeremy Dietz\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jval.2025.08.021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>When the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) assesses whether interventions in health and social care offer value for money, where possible, it considers health effects expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). NICE's preferred measure of health-related quality of life is the EQ-5D. For non-health effects, NICE cites ASCOT and ICECAP as possible outcomes. To date, their use in NICE guidelines has not been reviewed.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aims of this study were to 1) review how ASCOT and ICECAP have been used in NICE social care and public health guidelines and 2) contextualize the review via expert interviews.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>NICE social care and public health guidelines published before 26/08/2025 were reviewed, and information on the use of ASCOT and ICECAP was extracted. Five experts were interviewed to contextualize review findings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the eligible guidelines, ASCOT appeared as an outcome in 4% and ICECAP in 1%. Neither measure significantly impacted committee's decision-making. Interview findings were grouped into two themes: (1) reasons behind the limited use of these measures (with 3 subthemes: conceptual, system-wide issues and implementation challenges); and (2) ongoing developments and future opportunities.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ASCOT and ICECAP appeared infrequently in the NICE guidelines reviewed, and when used, their impact on committee decision-making was limited-either due to trial-specific limitations or reliance on other forms of evidence. Experts suggested several barriers to the use of these measures, and although these barriers are not insurmountable, it is unclear if such measures may appear more in future NICE social care and public health guidelines.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23508,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Value in Health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Value in Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2025.08.021\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2025.08.021","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:当国家健康和护理卓越研究所(NICE)评估健康和社会护理干预措施是否物有所值时,在可能的情况下,它会考虑以质量调整生命年(QALYs)表示的健康影响。NICE对健康相关生活质量的首选测量是EQ-5D。对于非健康影响,NICE将ASCOT和ICECAP列为可能的结果。迄今为止,它们在NICE指南中的使用尚未被审查。目的:本研究的目的是1)回顾ASCOT和ICECAP在NICE社会护理和公共卫生指南中的应用情况,2)通过专家访谈将回顾置于背景中。方法:回顾2025年8月26日之前发布的NICE社会护理和公共卫生指南,提取有关ASCOT和ICECAP使用的信息。五位专家接受了采访,以了解审查结果的背景。结果:在符合条件的指南中,ASCOT作为结局出现的比例为4%,ICECAP为1%。这两项措施都没有显著影响委员会的决策。访谈结果分为两个主题:(1)这些措施有限使用背后的原因(有3个分主题:概念、全系统问题和实施挑战);(2)持续的发展和未来的机会。结论:ASCOT和ICECAP在NICE审查的指南中很少出现,当使用时,它们对委员会决策的影响是有限的,要么是由于试验特定的限制,要么是依赖于其他形式的证据。专家们提出了使用这些措施的几个障碍,尽管这些障碍并非不可克服,但尚不清楚这些措施是否会更多地出现在未来的NICE社会护理和公共卫生指南中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
ASCOT and ICECAP in decision-making: A review of NICE social care and public health guidelines.

Background: When the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) assesses whether interventions in health and social care offer value for money, where possible, it considers health effects expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). NICE's preferred measure of health-related quality of life is the EQ-5D. For non-health effects, NICE cites ASCOT and ICECAP as possible outcomes. To date, their use in NICE guidelines has not been reviewed.

Objectives: The aims of this study were to 1) review how ASCOT and ICECAP have been used in NICE social care and public health guidelines and 2) contextualize the review via expert interviews.

Methods: NICE social care and public health guidelines published before 26/08/2025 were reviewed, and information on the use of ASCOT and ICECAP was extracted. Five experts were interviewed to contextualize review findings.

Results: Of the eligible guidelines, ASCOT appeared as an outcome in 4% and ICECAP in 1%. Neither measure significantly impacted committee's decision-making. Interview findings were grouped into two themes: (1) reasons behind the limited use of these measures (with 3 subthemes: conceptual, system-wide issues and implementation challenges); and (2) ongoing developments and future opportunities.

Conclusions: ASCOT and ICECAP appeared infrequently in the NICE guidelines reviewed, and when used, their impact on committee decision-making was limited-either due to trial-specific limitations or reliance on other forms of evidence. Experts suggested several barriers to the use of these measures, and although these barriers are not insurmountable, it is unclear if such measures may appear more in future NICE social care and public health guidelines.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Value in Health
Value in Health 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
3064
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.
×
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