ReviewCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2024
Economic evaluations in medical technological innovations a mapping review of methodologies.
Review in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic evaluation of uncertainty quantification techniques in deep learning: a case study in photoplethysmography signal analysis.Machine learning. Health · 2026Article
- Neurosurgery 4.0: A Scoping Review of Current Trends and Challenges in Specialized Smart Hospitals.Cureus · 2025Review
- Propensity score matching for comparative studies: a tutorial with R and Rex.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationaleEconomic evaluations play an important role in the development and implementation of healthcare innovations. For pharmaceutical products, the methodologies used are laid down in guidelines, whereas for medical technologies the guidelines are not as strenuous. The aim of this review was therefore to analyze what types of methodologies are used in economic evaluations of medical technologies.
methodsWe performed a mapping review to identify economic evaluations for medical technologies. We decided to limit our search to one year (2022) and included cost utility and cost effectiveness analyses in which health technologies were evaluated. For each included study we identified the main methodological characteristics.
resultsA total of 364 papers were included in the analysis, 268 (74%) contained cost-utility analyses and 91 (25%) cost-effectiveness analyses. A model was used in 236 (64%) analyses, 117 analyses were trial based evaluations. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses and/or bootstrapping was performed in 266 (73%) analyses. Deterministic sensitivity analyses were used in 306 (84%). Time horizon and perspective were underreported in 15-25% of the included studies.
conclusionsThis review shows the wide range of methodologies used in economic evaluations as well as the extent and rigor in which these methodologies are used. Many of the included papers did no use or did not sufficiently report the use of appropriate standard methods. This may lead to research waste, a delay in successful implementation of valuable innovations and in the end may delay improvement patient outcomes.
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.