Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39110388›Full record

SynthesisPharmacoEconomics2024

Rethinking Tuberculosis Morbidity Quantification: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of TB Disability Weights in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses.

Ewan M Tomeny, Thomas Hampton, Phuong Bich Tran, Laura Rosu, Mphatso D Phiri, Kathryn A Haigh, Jasper Nidoi, Tom Wingfield, Eve Worrall

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PharmacoEconomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Ewan M TomenyClinical Sciences Department, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK. ewan.tomeny@lstmed.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-4547-2389
Thomas HamptonClinical Sciences Department, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.
Phuong Bich TranNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Laura RosuClinical Sciences Department, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.
Mphatso D PhiriClinical Sciences Department, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.
Kathryn A HaighInstitute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Jasper NidoiClinical Sciences Department, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.
Tom WingfieldClinical Sciences Department, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.
Eve WorrallClinical Sciences Department, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe disability-adjusted life year (DALY), a key metric for health resource allocation, encompasses morbidity through disability weights. Widely used in tuberculosis cost-effectiveness analysis (CEAs), DALYs play a significant role in informing intervention adopt/reject decisions. This study reviews the values and consistency of disability weights applied in tuberculosis-related CEAs.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review using the Tufts CEA database, updated to July 2023 with searches in Embase, Scopus and PubMed. Eligible studies needed to have included a cost-per-DALY ratio, and additionally either evaluated a tuberculosis (TB) intervention or included tuberculosis-related weights. We considered all tuberculosis health states: with/without human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) coinfection, TB treatments and treatment side effects. Data were screened and extracted independently by combinations of two authors.

findingsA total of 105 studies spanning 2002-2023 across 50 countries (mainly low- and middle-income countries) were extracted. Disability weights were sourced primarily from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD; 100/165; 61%), with 17 non-GBD studies additionally referenced, along with primary derivation. Inconsistencies in the utilisation of weights were evident: of the 100 usages of GBD-sourced weights, only in 47 instances (47%) had the weight value been explicitly specified with an appropriate up-to-date reference cited (constituting 28% of all weight usages, 47/165). Sensitivity analyses on weight values had been conducted in 30% of studies (31/105). Twelve studies did not clearly specify weights or their sources; nine further calculated DALYs without morbidity. The review suggests methodological gaps in current approaches for representing important aspects of TB, including TB-HIV coinfection, treatment, drug-resistance, extrapulmonary TB and psychological impacts. We propose a set of best practice recommendations.

interpretationThere is a need for increased rigour in the application, sensitivity testing and reporting of TB disability weights. Furthermore, there appears a desire among researchers to reflect elements of the tuberculosis experience beyond those allowed for by GBD disability weights.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisDisability-Adjusted Life YearsTuberculosisAntitubercular AgentsGlobal Burden of DiseaseHIV InfectionsHumansPersons with DisabilitiesQuality-Adjusted Life YearsAntitubercular Agents

Identifiers

PMID39110388
PMCPMC11499453

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.