ArticleBMC medical research methodology2006
Economics methods in Cochrane systematic reviews of health promotion and public health related interventions.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Primary-level and community worker interventions for the prevention of mental disorders and the promotion of well-being in low- and middle-income countries.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Community Guide Methods for Systematic Reviews of Economic Evidence.American journal of preventive medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Systematic review on cost-effectiveness analysis of school-based oral health promotion program.PloS one · 2023Pooled it
- The cost-effectiveness of tranexamic acid for treatment of postpartum hemorrhage: A systematic review.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2021Pooled it
- A systematic review of the quality and scope of economic evaluations in child oral health research.BMC oral health · 2019Pooled it
- A systematic review of decision analytic modeling techniques for the economic evaluation of dental caries interventions.PloS one · 2019Pooled it
- Issues in the incorporation of economic perspectives and evidence into Cochrane reviews.Systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Challenges of Systematic Reviews of Economic Evaluations: A Review of Recent Reviews and an Obesity Case Study.PharmacoEconomics · 2020Review
- Article
- Outcome measurement in economic evaluations of public health interventions: a role for the capability approach?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2010Review
- Non-biomedical sources for systematic reviews of pharmaceutical policy.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProvision of evidence on costs alongside evidence on the effects of interventions can enhance the relevance of systematic reviews to decision-making. However, patterns of use of economics methods alongside systematic review remain unclear. Reviews of evidence on the effects of interventions are published by both the Cochrane and Campbell Collaborations. Although it is not a requirement that Cochrane or Campbell Reviews should consider economic aspects of interventions, many do. This study aims to explore and describe approaches to incorporating economics methods in a selection of Cochrane systematic reviews in the area of health promotion and public health, to help inform development of methodological guidance on economics for reviewers.
methodsThe Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was searched using a search strategy for potential economic evaluation studies. We included current Cochrane reviews and review protocols retrieved using the search that are also identified as relevant to health promotion or public health topics. A reviewer extracted data which describe the economics components of included reviews. Extracted data were summarised in tables and analysed qualitatively.
resultsTwenty-one completed Cochrane reviews and seven review protocols met inclusion criteria. None incorporate formal economic evaluation methods. Ten completed reviews explicitly aim to incorporate economics studies and data. There is a lack of transparent reporting of methods underpinning the incorporation of economics studies and data. Some reviews are likely to exclude useful economics studies and data due to a failure to incorporate search strategies tailored to the retrieval of such data or use of key specialist databases, and application of inclusion criteria designed for effectiveness studies.
conclusionThere is a need for consistency and transparency in the reporting and conduct of the economics components of Cochrane reviews, as well as regular dialogue between Cochrane reviewers and economists to develop increased capacity for economic analyses alongside such reviews. Use of applicable economics methods in Cochrane reviews can help provide the international context within which economics data can be interpreted and assessed as a preliminary to full economic evaluation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.