A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluation Methodologies Between Resource-Limited and Resource-Rich Countries: A Case of Rotavirus Vaccines.

Thiboonboon, K; Santatiwongchai, B; Chantarastapornchit, V; Rattanavipapong, W; Teerawattananon, Y

A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluation Methodologies Between Resource-Limited and Resource-Rich Countries: A Case of Rotavirus Vaccines.

Thiboonboon, K

Santatiwongchai, B Chantarastapornchit, V Rattanavipapong, W Teerawattananon, Y

Permalink

Publisher:: SPRINGER INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHING AG
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Appl Health Econ Health Policy, 2016, 14, (6), pp. 659-672
Issue Date:: 2016-12

In Progress

	Filename	Description	Size
	out.pdf	Published version	835.37 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is being processed and is not currently available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Thiboonboon, K https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3922-4362
dc.contributor.author	Santatiwongchai, B
dc.contributor.author	Chantarastapornchit, V
dc.contributor.author	Rattanavipapong, W
dc.contributor.author	Teerawattananon, Y
dc.date.accessioned	2022-04-18T23:46:53Z
dc.date.available	2022-04-18T23:46:53Z
dc.date.issued	2016-12
dc.identifier.citation	Appl Health Econ Health Policy, 2016, 14, (6), pp. 659-672
dc.identifier.issn	1175-5652
dc.identifier.issn	1179-1896
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/156363
dc.description.abstract	BACKGROUND: For more than three decades, the number and influence of economic evaluations of healthcare interventions have been increasing and gaining attention from a policy level. However, concerns about the credibility of these studies exist, particularly in studies from low- and middle- income countries (LMICs). This analysis was performed to explore economic evaluations conducted in LMICs in terms of methodological variations, quality of reporting and evidence used for the analyses. These results were compared with those studies conducted in high-income countries (HICs). METHODS: Rotavirus vaccine was selected as a case study, as it is one of the interventions that many studies in both settings have explored. The search to identify individual studies on rotavirus vaccines was performed in March 2014 using MEDLINE and the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database. Only full economic evaluations, comparing cost and outcomes of at least two alternatives, were included for review. Selected criteria were applied to assess methodological variation, quality of reporting and quality of evidence used. RESULTS: Eighty-five studies were included, consisting of 45 studies in HICs and 40 studies in LMICs. Seventy-five percent of the studies in LMICs were published by researchers from HICs. Compared with studies in HICs, the LMIC studies showed less methodological variety. In terms of the quality of reporting, LMICs had a high adherence to technical criteria, but HICs ultimately proved to be better. The same trend applied for the quality of evidence used. CONCLUSION: Although the quality of economic evaluations in LMICs was not as high as those from HICs, it is of an acceptable level given several limitations that exist in these settings. However, the results of this study may not reflect the fact that LMICs have developed a better research capacity in the domain of health economics, given that most of the studies were in theory led by researchers from HICs. Putting more effort into fostering the development of both research infrastructure and capacity building as well as encouraging local engagement in LMICs is thus necessary.
dc.format	Print
dc.language	eng
dc.publisher	SPRINGER INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHING AG
dc.relation.ispartof	Appl Health Econ Health Policy
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1007/s40258-016-0265-y
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
dc.subject	1117 Public Health and Health Services, 1402 Applied Economics, 1505 Marketing
dc.subject.classification	Health Policy & Services
dc.subject.mesh	Biomedical Research
dc.subject.mesh	Capacity Building
dc.subject.mesh	Cost-Benefit Analysis
dc.subject.mesh	Developed Countries
dc.subject.mesh	Developing Countries
dc.subject.mesh	Evidence-Based Practice
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Rotavirus Vaccines
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Rotavirus Vaccines
dc.subject.mesh	Biomedical Research
dc.subject.mesh	Developed Countries
dc.subject.mesh	Developing Countries
dc.subject.mesh	Cost-Benefit Analysis
dc.subject.mesh	Evidence-Based Practice
dc.subject.mesh	Capacity Building
dc.title	A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluation Methodologies Between Resource-Limited and Resource-Rich Countries: A Case of Rotavirus Vaccines.
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	14
utslib.location.activity	New Zealand
utslib.for	1117 Public Health and Health Services
utslib.for	1402 Applied Economics
utslib.for	1505 Marketing
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - CHERE - Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health/Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation
utslib.copyright.status	in_progress	*
dc.date.updated	2022-04-18T23:46:52Z
pubs.issue	6
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	14
utslib.citation.issue	6

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: For more than three decades, the number and influence of economic evaluations of healthcare interventions have been increasing and gaining attention from a policy level. However, concerns about the credibility of these studies exist, particularly in studies from low- and middle- income countries (LMICs). This analysis was performed to explore economic evaluations conducted in LMICs in terms of methodological variations, quality of reporting and evidence used for the analyses. These results were compared with those studies conducted in high-income countries (HICs). METHODS: Rotavirus vaccine was selected as a case study, as it is one of the interventions that many studies in both settings have explored. The search to identify individual studies on rotavirus vaccines was performed in March 2014 using MEDLINE and the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database. Only full economic evaluations, comparing cost and outcomes of at least two alternatives, were included for review. Selected criteria were applied to assess methodological variation, quality of reporting and quality of evidence used. RESULTS: Eighty-five studies were included, consisting of 45 studies in HICs and 40 studies in LMICs. Seventy-five percent of the studies in LMICs were published by researchers from HICs. Compared with studies in HICs, the LMIC studies showed less methodological variety. In terms of the quality of reporting, LMICs had a high adherence to technical criteria, but HICs ultimately proved to be better. The same trend applied for the quality of evidence used. CONCLUSION: Although the quality of economic evaluations in LMICs was not as high as those from HICs, it is of an acceptable level given several limitations that exist in these settings. However, the results of this study may not reflect the fact that LMICs have developed a better research capacity in the domain of health economics, given that most of the studies were in theory led by researchers from HICs. Putting more effort into fostering the development of both research infrastructure and capacity building as well as encouraging local engagement in LMICs is thus necessary.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/156363