SynthesisBMJ open2016
Economic evaluations on centralisation of specialised healthcare services: a systematic review of methods.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Development of a core outcome set for studies on centralization of healthcare services.BMC health services research · 2026Pooled it
- Burden of Travel is not Associated with Adherence to Follow-up Appointments - A Call for Centralization of Cleft Care in Germany.The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2026Article
- Article
- Anticipated effects of centralising complex gastrointestinal surgery in a rural area in Germany - perspective of health professionals: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Protocol for the development of a core outcome set for studies on centralisation of healthcare services.BMJ open · 2023Article
- The Pervasiveness of Power: Dilemmas for Researchers of Major System Change in Healthcare Comment on "'Attending to History' in Major System Change in Healthcare in England: Specialist Cancer Surgery Service Reconfiguration".International journal of health policy and management · 2023Article
- Cost-Utility Analysis of Major System Change in Specialist Cancer Surgery in London, England, Using Linked Patient-Level Electronic Health Records and Difference-in-Differences Analysis.Applied health economics and health policy · 2022Article
- Short-term outcome of isolated lateral malleolar fracture treatment is independent of hospital trauma volume or teaching status: a nationwide retrospective cohort study.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2022Article
- Developing a dynamic simulation model to support the nationwide implementation of whole genome sequencing in lung cancer.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Article
- How to Cost the Implementation of Major System Change for Economic Evaluations: Case Study Using Reconfigurations of Specialist Cancer Surgery in Part of London, England.Applied health economics and health policy · 2021Article
- The volume and outcome relationship for thyroidectomy in England.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2021Article
- The associations between injury mechanism and extended hospital stay among pediatric patients: findings from a trauma Center in Saudi Arabia.BMC pediatrics · 2019Article
- Perspectives on the underlying drivers of urgent and emergency care reconfiguration in Ireland.The International journal of health planning and management · 2018Article
- The potential role of cost-utility analysis in the decision to implement major system change in acute stroke services in metropolitan areas in England.Health research policy and systems · 2018Article
- Article
- Distance to Specialist Care and Disease Outcomes in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Inflammatory bowel diseases · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo systematically review and appraise the quality of economic evaluations assessing centralisation of specialised healthcare services.
methodsA systematic review to identify economic evaluations on centralisation of any specialised healthcare service. Full economic evaluations comparing costs and consequences of centralisation of any specialised healthcare service were eligible for inclusion. Methodological characteristics of included studies were appraised using checklists adapted from recommended guidelines.
resultsA total of 64 full-text articles met the inclusion criteria. Two studies were conducted in the UK. Most of the studies used volume of activity as a proxy measure of centralisation. The methods used to assess centralisation were heterogeneous. Studies differed in terms of study design used and aspect of centralisation they considered. There were major limitations in studies. Only 12 studies reported the study perspective. Charges which are not true representation of costs were used by 17 studies to assess cost outcomes. Only 10 reported the detailed breakdown of the cost components used in their analysis. Discounting was necessary in 14 studies but was reported only in 7 studies. Sensitivity analyses were included by less than one-third of the studies. The applicability of the identified studies to a setting other than the one they were conducted in is questionable, given variations in the organisation of services and healthcare costs. Centralisation as a concept has also been variably and narrowly defined as activity of specific services which may not reflect the wider aspects of centralisation.
conclusionsConfounded and biased information coming from studies without standardised methods may mislead decision-makers towards making wrong decisions on centralisation. It is important to improve the methodology and reporting of economic evaluations in order to provide more robust and transferable evidence. Wider aspects of healthcare centralisation should be considered in the estimates of costs and health outcomes.
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.