Dataset Information

Developing core economic parameter sets for asthma studies: a realist review and an analytical framework.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To develop a standardised set of economic parameters (core economic parameter set) for economic evaluations in asthma studies. DESIGN:A systematic literature review and an analytical framework. OUTCOME MEASURES:Economic parameters used to evaluate costs and cost-effectiveness of healthcare interventions for people with asthma. DATA SOURCES:PubMed, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and the Health Technology Aaaessment Library starting from 1990. REVIEW METHODS:Research methods were based on the realist review methodology and included a number of non-sequential, iterative and overlapping components, such as developing an analytical framework for the realist review; systematic literature review of economic parameters; identifying and categorising economic parameters; producing preliminary list of core economic parameters. RESULTS:Database searches found 2531 publications of which 224 were included in the systematic review. We identified 65 economic parameters that were categorised into 11 groups to enable the realist synthesis. Parameters related to secondary care, primary care, medication use, emergency care and work productivity comprised 84% of all economic parameters. An analytical framework was used to investigate the rationale behind the choices of economic parameters in these studies. The main framework domains included type of intervention, research population, study design, study setting and a stakeholder's perspective. CONCLUSION:Past research thus suggests that in asthma study parameters depicting the use of secondary care, primary care, medication, emergency care and work productivity can be considered as core economic parameters, since they apply to different types of studies. Parameters including diagnostics, healthcare delivery, school activity, informal care, medical devices and health utility apply to a particular type of study (or research question), and thus can be recommended as supplemental parameters. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42017067867.

SUBMITTER: Roukas C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7577034 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Developing core economic parameter sets for asthma studies: a realist review and an analytical framework.

Roukas Chris C Quayyum Zahidul Z Patel Anita A Fitzsimmons Deborah D Phillips Ceri C Hounsome Natalia N

BMJ open 20201020 10

<h4>Objective</h4>To develop a standardised set of economic parameters (core economic parameter set) for economic evaluations in asthma studies.<h4>Design</h4>A systematic literature review and an analytical framework.<h4>Outcome measures</h4>Economic parameters used to evaluate costs and cost-effectiveness of healthcare interventions for people with asthma.<h4>Data sources</h4>PubMed, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, the Data ...[more]

PMID: 33082188

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionCore outcome sets are standardised lists of outcomes, which should be measured and reported in all clinical studies of a specific condition. This study aims to develop core outcome sets for economic evaluations in asthma studies. Economic outcomes include items such as costs, resource use or quality-adjusted life years. The starting point in developing core outcome sets will be conducting a systematic literature review to establish a preliminary list of reporting items to be considered for inclusion in the core outcome set.Methods and analysisWe will conduct literature searches of peer-reviewed studies published from January 1990 to January 2017. These will include any comparative or observational studies (including economic models) and systematic reviews reporting economic outcomes. All identified economic outcomes will be tabulated together with the major study characteristics, such as population, study design, the nature and intensity of the intervention, mode of data collection and instrument(s) used to derive an outcome. We will undertake a 'realist synthesis review' to analyse the identified economic outcomes. The outcomes will be summarised in the context of evaluation perspectives, types of economic evaluation and methodological approaches. Parallel to undertaking a systematic review, we will conduct semistructured interviews with stakeholders (including people with personal experience of asthma, health professionals, researchers and decision makers) in order to explore additional outcomes which have not been considered, or used, in published studies. The list of outcomes generated from the systematic review and interviews with stakeholders will form the basis of a Delphi survey to refine the identified outcomes into a core outcome set.Ethics and disseminationThe review will not involve access to individual-level data. Findings from our systematic review will be communicated to a broad range of stakeholders including clinical guideline developers, research funders, trial registries, ethics committees and other regulators.

Project description:Background: There is an urgent need to inform decision-making and safe delivery of vaccines in a timely manner. Our objective is to describe the methods we used to perform a patient-oriented realist evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination implementation in Saskatchewan, Canada, in order to understand the underlying mechanisms and contexts of vaccination implementation and vaccine uptake. Methods: This methodology paper describes a patient-oriented, realist, mixed-method evaluation to assess COVID-19 vaccination implementation in Regina, Saskatoon and Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. The study comprised 3 iterative phases guided by Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards II (RAMESES II). In phase 1 (January–February 2021), we developed the initial program theory, in phase 2 (March–May 2021), we tested and refined the initial program theory, and in phase 3 (June–July 2021), we established the final program theory. Three patient and family partners with different backgrounds and experiences were selected purposively from various locations (urban and rural) in Saskatchewan to engage collaboratively in the evaluation. Data analysis and synthesis occurred at all 3 phases of the project. We analysed qualitative data from phases 2 and 3 using a “retroductive” approach. We used quantitative data to compare outcomes from the 3 sites. Interpretation: This protocol describes how we developed a final program theory for COVID-19 vaccination implementation with patient and family partners to show for whom, under what circumstances, how and why Saskatchewan’s COVID-19 vaccination program has led to vaccine uptake. With patient and family partners’ engagement, the evaluation findings will be shared with the Saskatchewan Health Authority and provincial government policy-makers and communications departments, published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at provincial or national conferences, and disseminated through any additional media identified by the patient and family partners.

Project description:BackgroundLife course studies are designed to "collect once, use multiple times" for observational and, increasingly, interventional research. Core Outcome Sets (COS) are minimum sets developed for clinical trials by multi-stakeholder consensus methodologies. We aimed to synthesize published COS that might guide outcomes selection for early life cohorts with an interventional focus.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Medline, COMET, and CROWN for COS published before January 2021 relevant to four life stages (pregnancy, newborns, children <8 years, and parents (adults aged 18-50 years)). We synthesized core outcomes into overarching constructs.ResultsFrom 46 COS we synthesized 414 core outcomes into 118 constructs. "Quality of life", "adverse events", "medication use", "hospitalization", and "mortality" were consistent across all stages. For pregnancy, common constructs included "preterm birth", "delivery mode", "pre-eclampsia", "gestational weight gain", "gestational diabetes", and "hemorrhage"; for newborns, "birthweight", "small for gestational age", "neurological damage", and "morbidity" and "infection/sepsis"; for pediatrics, "pain", "gastrointestinal morbidity", "growth/weight", "breastfeeding", "feeding problems", "hearing", "neurodevelopmental morbidity", and "social development"; and for adults, "disease burden", "mental health", "neurological function/stroke", and "cardiovascular health/morbidity".ConclusionThis COS synthesis generated outcome constructs that are of high value to stakeholders (participants, health providers, services), relevant to life course research, and could position cohorts for trial capabilities.ImpactWe synthesized existing Core Outcome Sets as a transparent methodology that could prioritize outcomes for lifecourse cohorts with an interventional focus. "Quality of life", "adverse events", "medication use", "hospitalization", and "mortality" are important outcomes across pregnancy, newborns, childhood, and early-to-mid-adulthood (the age range relevant to parents). Other common outcomes (such as "birthweight", "cognitive function/ability", "psychological health") are also highly relevant to lifecourse research. This synthesis could assist new early life cohorts to pre-select outcomes that are of high value to stakeholders (participants, health providers, services), are relevant to lifecourse research, and could position them for future trials and interventional capability.

Dataset Information

Developing core economic parameter sets for asthma studies: a realist review and an analytical framework.

Publications

Developing core economic parameter sets for asthma studies: a realist review and an analytical framework.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets