Abstract
Abstract
Objectives
To review the development of economic evaluation guidelines (EEGs) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), with the goal of assisting those developing EEGs in LMICs.
Methods
We conducted a systematic search in MEDLINE (Ovid), PubMed, EconLit, Embase (Ovid), the Cochrane Library, and the gray literature until March 2021. We extracted data on the methods used in the EEG development process, the responsible party engaged, and the development team’s composition. We conducted a quality assessment, using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-Health Systems tool, and then carried out a relative comparison.
Results
Fourteen EEGs and nine studies were identified. In ten countries, the Ministry of Health was responsible for handling the development process. The majority of LMICs who developed EEGs did not explicitly report the discipline of those involved in the process. The developers of EEGs followed four main steps: conducting a review on national guidelines, organizing workshops, and getting support from international experts or from organizations. One-third of the identified EEGs failed to engage multisectoral or multidisciplinary developers, and approximately 14 percent did not follow or report any recommended step.
Conclusions
This study identified a scarcity of published information related to the development process and the suboptimal quality of included studies. It provides relevant material to support international organizations and developers of guidelines in LMICs in developing EEGs that fit their national context. In addition, this paper recommends a transparent approach to the design of guidelines and to reporting on the methods for developing them.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference51 articles.
1. 19. Ministério da Saúde (2014) Diretrizes metodológicas Diretriz de Avaliação Econômica. 2a edição. Available at: http://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/ct/PDF/dirtrizes_de_avaliacao_economica.pdf (Accessed 2021).
2. The International Decision Support Initiative Reference Case for Economic Evaluation: An Aid to Thought
3. Announcing the new definition of health technology assessment;O’Rourke;Value Heal.,2020
4. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement
5. 23. Mercosur (2013) Guía metodológica para estudios de evaluación [Internet]. Available at: http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/bitstream/handle/10915/44143/MERCOSUR-_Guía_metodológica_para_estudios_de_evaluación_económica_de_tecnologías_sanitarias__30_p._.pdf?sequence=63&isAllowed=y.
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献