Unknown

Dataset Information

0

Disparities in model-based cost-effectiveness analyses of tuberculosis diagnosis: A systematic review.


ABSTRACT: Structural approach disparities were minimally addressed in past systematic reviews of model-based cost-effectiveness analyses addressing Tuberculosis management strategies. This review aimed to identify the structural approach disparities in model-based cost-effectiveness analysis studies addressing Tuberculosis diagnosis and describe potential hazards caused by those disparities.A systematic search to identify studies published before October 2015 was performed in five electronic databases. After removal of duplication, studies' titles and abstracts were screened based on predetermined criteria. The full texts of potentially relevant studies were subsequently screened and excluded when they did not address active pulmonary Tuberculosis diagnosis. Quality of the studies was assessed using the "Philips' checklist." Various data regarding general information, cost-effectiveness results, and disease modeling were extracted using standardized data extraction forms. Data pertaining to models' structural approaches were compared and analyzed qualitatively for their applicability in various study settings, as well as their potential influence on main outcomes and cost-effectiveness conclusion.A total of 27 studies were included in the review. Most studies utilized a static model, which could underestimate the cost-effectiveness of the diagnostic tools strategies, due to the omission of indirect diagnosis effects, i.e. transmission reduction. A few structural assumption disparities were found in the dynamic models. Extensive disparities were found in the static models, consisting of varying structural assumptions regarding treatment outcomes, clinical diagnosis and empirical treatment, inpatient discharge decision, and re-diagnosis of false negative patients.In cost-effectiveness analysis studies addressing active pulmonary Tuberculosis diagnosis, models showed numerous disparities in their structural approaches. Several structural approaches could be inapplicable in certain settings. Furthermore, they could contribute to under- or overestimation of the cost-effectiveness of the diagnosis tools or strategies. They could thus lead to ambiguities and difficulties when interpreting a study result. A set of recommendations is proposed to manage issues related to these structural disparities.

SUBMITTER: Padmasawitri TIA 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5942841 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

Disparities in model-based cost-effectiveness analyses of tuberculosis diagnosis: A systematic review.

Padmasawitri T I Armina TIA   Frederix Gerardus W GW   Alisjahbana Bachti B   Klungel Olaf O   Hövels Anke M AM  

PloS one 20180509 5


<h4>Background</h4>Structural approach disparities were minimally addressed in past systematic reviews of model-based cost-effectiveness analyses addressing Tuberculosis management strategies. This review aimed to identify the structural approach disparities in model-based cost-effectiveness analysis studies addressing Tuberculosis diagnosis and describe potential hazards caused by those disparities.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic search to identify studies published before October 2015 was perform  ...[more]

Similar Datasets

| S-EPMC6205591 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6281264 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5998601 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5836308 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8096359 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6021555 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7867562 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8425319 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7864777 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7790765 | biostudies-literature