ReviewValue in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research2018
Methodological Issues in Assessing the Economic Value of Next-Generation Sequencing Tests: Many Challenges and Not Enough Solutions.
Review in Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 43 papers, 5 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
43 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Measuring the health benefits of genome and exome sequencing: a systematic review of economic evaluations.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Benefits and harms of antenatal and newborn screening programmes in health economic assessments: the VALENTIA systematic review and qualitative investigation.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Pooled it
- Benefits and harms adopted by health economic assessments evaluating antenatal and newborn screening programmes in OECD countries: A systematic review of 336 articles and reports.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2022Pooled it
- Health economic evidence for the use of molecular biomarker tests in hematological malignancies: A systematic review.European journal of haematology · 2022Pooled it
- Guidance for the Harmonisation and Improvement of Economic Evaluations of Personalised Medicine.PharmacoEconomics · 2021Pooled it
- Quantifying Downstream Healthcare Utilization in Studies of Genomic Testing.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2020Trial
- Societal Preferences, Values and Priorities for Genomic Testing for Atrial Fibrillation: Evidence from Two Discrete Choice Experiments.The patient · 2026Article
- Is next generation sequencing for the diagnosis of rare diseases worth its cost? A user-based approach to valuation.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Determining the value of genomics in healthcare.Nature medicine · 2025Review
- Methodological and Procedural Considerations for Developing Decision Analytic Models to Assess the Health Economic Impacts of Newborn Bloodspot Screening: A Systematic Methodological Review.International journal of neonatal screening · 2025Review
- According to Which Criteria Should the Undiagnosed Diseases Network's Value Be Assessed?AMA journal of ethics · 2025Article
- Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing in Infectious Diseases: Clinical Applications, Translational Challenges, and Future Directions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Australian Preferences for Prenatal Screening: A Discrete Choice Experiment Comparing Metropolitan and Rural/Regional Areas.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Performance of Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) in Indeterminate Thyroid Nodules: A Single Hospital Experience.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Review
- Article
- Clinical Value of Molecular Targets and FDA-Approved Genome-Targeted Cancer Therapies.JAMA oncology · 2024Article
- Article
- QALYs and rare diseases: exploring the responsiveness of SF-6D, EQ-5D-5L and AQoL-8D following genomic testing for childhood and adult-onset rare genetic conditions in Australia.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedCorrection.2019
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinical use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) tests has been increasing, but few studies have examined their economic value. Several studies have noted that there are methodological challenges to conducting economic evaluations of NGS tests.
objectiveOur objective was to examine key methodological challenges for conducting economic evaluations of NGS tests, prioritize these challenges for future research, and identify how studies have attempted solutions to address these challenges.
methodsWe identified challenges for economic evaluations of NGS tests using prior literature and expert judgment of the co-authors. We used a modified Delphi assessment to prioritize challenges, based on importance and probability of resolution. Using a structured literature review and article extraction we then assessed whether published economic evaluations had addressed these challenges.
resultsWe identified 11 challenges for conducting economic evaluations of NGS tests. The experts identified three challenges as the top priorities for future research: complex model structure, timeframe, and type of analysis and comparators used. Of the 15 published studies included in our literature review, four studies described specific solutions relevant to five of the 11 identified challenges.
conclusionsMajor methodological challenges to economic evaluations of NGS tests remain to be addressed. Our results can be used to guide future research and inform decision-makers on how to prioritize research on the economic assessment of NGS tests.
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.