ArticleF1000Research2024
Methodological literature on the reporting of systematic reviews of health economic evaluations: a scoping review protocol.
Article in F1000Research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development of a PRISMA extension for systematic reviews of health economic evaluations (PRISMA-EconEval): a project protocol.Systematic reviews · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Systematic reviews of health economic evaluations play a crucial role in informing evidence-based healthcare decisions, yet they lack standardized reporting guidelines. A project has been initiated that aims to extend the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline for systematic reviews of health economic evaluations (PRISMA-EconEval). This scoping review forms a foundation for the PRISMA-EconEval project, aiming to identify, map, and extract candidate reporting items from the methodological literature. The scoping review will follow the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) Checklist and involve comprehensive searches in databases such as PubMed MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science, covering the period from 2015 to 2024. Supplementary searching, reference checking and citation searching will target grey literature, overlooked studies and evidence prior to 2015. Inclusion criteria will focus on methodological papers that provide frameworks or recommendations for reporting systematic reviews of health economic evaluations and enhanced case studies that critically discuss methods and reporting structures. The extracted data will be coded and analyzed to produce an initial list of candidate reporting items, structured according to conventional sections of a systematic review (e.g., title, abstract, methods, results). This initial list will be used in the subsequent stages of the project and disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and presentations at international conferences. The outcome of this scoping review will significantly contribute to the development of a comprehensive PRISMA-EconEval reporting guideline, aimed at enhancing the transparency, consistency, and quality of systematic reviews of health economic evaluations, and provide an essential tool for authors, editors, peer-reviewers, and stakeholders.
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.