ReviewPharmacoEconomics - open2021
National Healthcare Economic Evaluation Guidelines: A Cross-Country Comparison.
Review in PharmacoEconomics - open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 6 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
58 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Decision-analytic models in the economic evaluation of community health worker programmes globally: a systematic review.BMJ global health · 2026Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of Decision-Analytic Modelling Approaches in Economic Evaluations of Post-traumatic Stress Disorder Treatments.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Pooled it
- Cost-Effectiveness of Routine Monitoring of Long-Term Conditions in Primary Care: Informing Decision Modelling with a Systematic Review in Hypertension, Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2024Pooled it
- The global economic burden of health anxiety/hypochondriasis- a systematic review.BMC public health · 2023Pooled it
- Multiplier Effects and Compensation Mechanisms for Inclusion in Health Economic Evaluation: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2023Pooled it
- Methods for Communicating the Impact of Parameter Uncertainty in a Multiple-Strategies Cost-Effectiveness Comparison.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022Pooled it
- Cost-Effectiveness of Personalised Nutrition in Adults With Overweight and Obesity: PREVENTOMICS Studies in Poland and the UK.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025Trial
- Impacts of the preceding cancer-specific health-related quality of life instruments on the responses to the subsequent EQ-5D-5L.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2023Trial
- Impact of a 21-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine on pneumococcal disease incidence among adults 65-84 years of age in Belgium: An epidemiological modeling study.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- Global Mapping of National Health Economic Evaluation Guidelines: Evidence from 40 Countries.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2026Review
- Uncertainty in Economic Evaluation: A Pragmatic Guide for Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Agencies in Resource-Constrained Settings.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Review
- Potential Public Health Impact of Updated COVID-19 Vaccination Strategies in Thailand: Epidemiological Data Update.Pulmonary therapy · 2026Article
- Cost effectiveness analysis of PEG-rhG-CSF versus rhG-CSF for primary prophylaxis of chemotherapy induced neutropenia in Chinese patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma using real world data.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- The feasibility and validity of the EQ-5D-Y and CHU9D in a challenging context: adolescent mental health in India.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
- Modeling the Potential Public Health Impact of Updated COVID-19 Vaccination Strategies in Singapore: Epidemiological Data Update.Pulmonary therapy · 2026Article
- Potential Public Health Impact of Updated COVID-19 Vaccination Strategies in Malaysia: Epidemiological Data Update.Pulmonary therapy · 2026Article
- What do HTA agencies need for generating health-related quality of life evidence? Findings from a global survey.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026Article
- Cost-utility Analysis of R-CHOP vs CHOP in Patients with Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma: A Systematic Review.Acta medica Philippina · 2026Article
- Exploring the Generalizability of Foreign Cost-Effectiveness Analysis to Spain Using Data From a Scoping Review of Multinational Studies.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Article
- 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
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesGlobally, a number of countries have developed guidelines that describe the design and conduct of economic evaluations as part of health technology assessment (HTA) or pharmacoeconomic analysis for decision making. The current scoping review was undertaken with an objective to summarize the recommendations made on methods of economic evaluation by the national healthcare economic evaluation (HEE) guidelines. METHODOLOGY: A comprehensive search was undertaken in the website repositories of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomic and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) and Guide to Economic Analysis and Research (GEAR), and websites of national HTA agencies and ministries of health of individual countries. All guidelines in the English language were included in this review. Data were extracted with respect to general and methodological characteristics, and a descriptive analysis of recommendations made across the countries was undertaken.
resultsOverall, our review included 31 national HEE guidelines, published between 1997 and August 2020. Nearly half (45%) of the guidelines targeted the evaluation of pharmaceuticals. The nature of the guidelines was either mandatory (31%), recommendatory (42%), or voluntary (16%). There was a substantial consensus among the guidelines on several key principles, including type of economic evaluation (cost-utility analysis), time horizon of the analysis (long enough), health outcome measure (quality-adjusted life-years) and use of sensitivity analyses. The recommendations on study perspective, comparator, discount rate and type of costs to be included (particularly the inclusion of indirect costs) varied widely.
conclusionDespite similarity in the overall processes, variation in several recommendations given by various national HEE guidelines was observed. This is perhaps unsurprising given the differences in the health systems and financing mechanisms, capacity of local researchers, and data availability. This review offers important lessons and a starting point for countries that are planning to develop their own HEE guidelines.
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.