Content of Health Economics Analysis Plans (HEAPs) for Trial-Based Economic Evaluations: Expert Delphi Consensus Survey.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objectives
Health economics analysis plans (HEAPs) currently lack consistency, with uncertainty surrounding appropriate content. We aimed to develop a list of essential items that should be included in HEAPs for economic evaluations conducted alongside randomized trials.Methods
A list of potential items for inclusion was developed by examining existing HEAPs. An electronic Delphi survey was conducted among professional health economists. Respondents were asked to rate potential items from 1 (least important) to 9 (most important), suggest additional items, and comment on proposed items (round 1). A second survey (round 2) was emailed to participants, including the participant's own scores from round 1 along with summary results from the whole panel; participants were asked to rerate each item. Consensus criteria for inclusion in the final list were predefined as >70% of participants rating an item 7-9 and <15% rating it 1-3 after round 2. A final item selection meeting was held to scrutinize the results and adjudicate on items lacking consensus.Results
62 participants completed round 1 of the survey. The initial list included 72 potential items; all 72 were carried forward to round 2, and no new items were added. 48 round 1 respondents (77.4%) completed round 2 and reached consensus on 53 items. At the final meeting, the expert panel (n = 9) agreed that 58 items should be included in the essential list, moved 9 items to an optional list, and dropped 5 items.Conclusions
Via expert consensus opinion, this study identified 58 items that are considered essential in a HEAP.
SUBMITTER: Thorn JC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8024512 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundCurrent research evidence challenges clinical decision-making when acupuncture is taken into consideration in the treatment of cognitive impairment (CI). Aiming to provide some viable recommendations for acupuncture practitioners in dealing with actual clinic issues, an expert consensus study was conducted.MethodsA clinical question investigation among 47 acupuncturists yielded 24 initial items. Subsequently, systematic reviews on acupuncture for CI were searched within three online databases. A panel of 30 authoritative experts were requested to respond with agreement, neutrality, or disagreement for each item. Consensus establishment was defined as the percentage of agreement on a given item >80%.ResultsFollowing a 2-round Delphi survey, there were 21 items reaching consensus and three items resulting in no consensus; of which 10 items reached 90∼100% agreement, and 80∼90% expert agreement was achieved for 11 items. These items could be roughly categorized into six domains: (1) therapeutic effects of acupuncture, (2) therapeutic principles, (3) acupoint selection and combination, (4) acupuncture parameters, (5) considerable combined therapies, and (6) possible adverse events.ConclusionWithout ready-made guidelines, this expert consensus may be conducive to guide acupuncturists in implementing clinical acupuncture practice for CI. Moreover, given the lack of high-quality research evidence and plenty of unresolved clinical issues in this field, it is of necessity to carry out more studies to better clarify the treatment algorithm.
| S-EPMC7732673 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundResource use measurement by patient recall is characterized by inconsistent methods and a lack of validation. A validated standardized resource use measure could increase data quality, improve comparability between studies, and reduce research burden.ObjectivesTo identify a minimum set of core resource use items that should be included in a standardized adult instrument for UK health economic evaluation from a provider perspective.MethodsHealth economists with experience of UK-based economic evaluations were recruited to participate in an electronic Delphi survey. Respondents were asked to rate 60 resource use items (e.g., medication names) on a scale of 1 to 9 according to the importance of the item in a generic context. Items considered less important according to predefined consensus criteria were dropped and a second survey was developed. In the second round, respondents received the median score and their own score from round 1 for each item alongside summarized comments and were asked to rerate items. A final project team meeting was held to determine the recommended core set.ResultsForty-five participants completed round 1. Twenty-six items were considered less important and were dropped, 34 items were retained for the second round, and no new items were added. Forty-two respondents (93.3%) completed round 2, and greater consensus was observed. After the final meeting, 10 core items were selected, with further items identified as suitable for "bolt-on" questionnaire modules.ConclusionsThe consensus on 10 items considered important in a generic context suggests that a standardized instrument for core resource use items is feasible.
| S-EPMC6021557 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveIt has been suggested that the sequelae of trauma are under-recognized in youth on the autism spectrum. We aimed to generate expert consensus regarding important trauma indicators, including but not limited to traumatic stress symptoms, in autistic youth.MethodsWe recruited 72 experts in autism and/or childhood trauma. Via a 2-round Delphi survey, experts commented on and rated the importance of 48 potential indicators, drawn from PTSD criteria and a broader literature on traumatic sequelae in autism. A revised list of 51 indicators, 18 clinical guidelines developed from expert comments, and summaries of expert qualifications and ratings from Round 1 were submitted to a second round (n = 66; 92% retention) of expert review and rating.ResultsTwenty-two indicators reached consensus (>75% round 2 endorsement). Many, but not all, reflected PTSD criteria, including intrusions (e.g., trauma re-enactments in perseverative play/speech), avoidance of trauma-reminders, and negative alterations in mood/cognition (e.g., diminished interest in activities) and in arousal/reactivity (e.g., exaggerated startle). Experts also identified increased reliance on others, adaptive and language regressions, self-injurious behavior, and non-suicidal self-injury as important indicators. Consensus guidelines emphasized the need for tailored measures, developmentally informed criteria, and multiple informants to increase diagnostic accuracy.ConclusionsExpert consensus emphasizes and informs a need for tailored diagnostic guidelines and measures to more sensitively assess traumatic reactions in autistic youth.
| S-EPMC10368297 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo provide a consensus from a panel of international experts about electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) and heated tobacco products (HTP).DesignCross-sectional survey.MethodsA Delphi survey was conducted among international experts in tobacco control and smoking cessation. The first part addressed statements or recommendations about ENDS, the second about HTP, both divided into four categories: regulation, sale, use and general issues.SettingExperts from 15 countries.ParticipantsIndividuals with clinical, public health or research expertise in tobacco control and/or smoking cessation.Results268 experts were contacted, 92 (34%) completed the first, 55/92 (60%) the second round. Consensus for ENDS: components of e-liquids, an upper limit of nicotine concentration should be defined; a warning on the lack of evidence in long-term safety and addiction potential should be stated; ENDS should not be regulated as consumer products but either as a new category of nicotine delivery or tobacco products; ENDS should not be sold in general stores but in specialised shops, shops selling tobacco or in pharmacies with restriction on sale to minors; administration of illegal drugs is likely with ENDS. Consensus for HTP: HTP have the same addictive potential as cigarettes; they should be regulated as a tobacco product with similar warning messages as cigarettes; their advertisement should not be allowed. ENDS and HTP use should not be allowed in indoor public places; a specific tax should be implemented for ENDS, taxes on HTP should not be lower than those for cigarettes; use of cigarettes is more likely with both ENDS and HTP (dual use) than quitting smoking.ConclusionsExperts in tobacco control and/or smoking cessation recommend differential regulation for ENDS and HTP. The results of this survey may be useful for health authorities, decision makers and researchers of the tobacco use and cessation field.
| S-EPMC8451280 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsConsensus regarding an optimal algorithm for endoscopic treatment of papillary adenomas has not been established. We aimed to assess the existing degree of consensus among international experts and develop further concordance by means of a Delphi process.MethodsFifty-two international experts in the field of endoscopic papillectomy were invited to participate. Data were collected between August and December 2019 using an online survey platform. Three rounds were conducted. Consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement.ResultsSixteen experts (31%) completed the full process, and consensus was achieved on 47 of the final 79 statements (59%). Diagnostic workup should include at least an upper endoscopy using a duodenoscope (100%) and biopsy sampling (94%). There should be selected use of additional abdominal imaging (75%-81%). Patients with (suspected) papillary malignancy or over 1 cm intraductal extension should be referred for surgical resection (76%). To prevent pancreatitis, rectal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs should be administered before resection (82%) and a pancreatic stent should be placed (100%). A biliary stent is indicated in case of ongoing bleeding from the papillary region (76%) or concerns for a (micro)perforation after resection (88%). Follow-up should be started 3 to 6 months after initial papillectomy and repeated every 6 to 12 months for at least 5 years (75%).ConclusionsThis is the first step in developing an international consensus-based algorithm for endoscopic management of papillary adenomas. Surprisingly, in many areas consensus could not be achieved. These aspects should be the focus of future studies.
| S-EPMC8878358 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Differences between country-specific guidelines for economic evaluations complicate the execution of international economic evaluations. The aim of this study was to develop cross-European recommendations for the identification, measurement and valuation of resource use and lost productivity in economic evaluations using a Delphi procedure.A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify European guidelines on the execution of economic evaluations or costing studies as part of economic evaluations. Guideline recommendations were extracted by two independent reviewers and formed the basis for the first round of the Delphi study, which was conducted among European health economic experts. During three written rounds, consensus (agreement of 67% or higher) was sought on items concerning the identification, measurement and valuation of costs.Recommendations from 18 guidelines were extracted. Consensus among 26 panellists from 17 European countries was reached on 61 of 68 items. The recommendations from the Delphi study are to adopt a societal perspective, to use patient report for measuring resource use and lost productivity, to value both constructs with use of country-specific standardized/unit costs and to use country-specific discounting rates.This study provides consensus-based cross-European recommendations on how to measure and value resource use and lost productivity in economic evaluations. These recommendations are expected to support researchers, healthcare professionals, and policymakers in executing and appraising economic evaluations performed in international contexts.
| S-EPMC6105226 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Antidote stocking represents a major challenge to hospitals all over the world, including Kuwait. In order to assist hospitals to reduce costs and improve patient care, an essential antidote list can be used as an initial foundation for securing sufficient antidote availability at healthcare institutions. The aim of our study is to generate a nationally relevant essential antidote list for emergency care hospitals in Kuwait using the e-Delphi method by establishing consensus through a multidisciplinary expert group of healthcare providers. An electronic survey with 47 essential antidotes was developed. The e-Delphi method was used, with three rounds of voting, to determine expert consensus on an essential antidote list for hospitals in Kuwait. A purposive sample of healthcare professionals from governmental and private hospitals were selected for this study (n = 30). Consensus was gained if ≥75% of the expert panel agreed on the inclusion of the antidote, without any strong disagreements. Round 1 of the e-Delphi resulted in 41 antidotes reaching consensus and seven new antidotes suggested by the expert panel. Round 2 had two antidotes (out of seven newly suggested ones) reaching consensus. Round 3 was a confirmatory round, where the expert group agreed on their previous rounds' opinions. This resulted in the development of an essential antidote list with 43 antidotes. The optimal approach for ensuring adequate availability of antidotes is continuous monitoring of local poisoning incidence and antidote requirements through collaborations between academic researchers and emergency care clinicians. The development of an essential antidote list, with expert consensus, is one of the initial steps in securing a foundation for appropriate provision of antidotes at all healthcare institutions. This is the first study that the authors are aware of that demonstrates that the e-Delphi technique can consolidate recommendations of experts in emergency medicine to provide a list of essential antidotes.
| S-EPMC9202922 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsThere is considerable controversy regarding optimal management of patients with paraesophageal hiatus hernia (pHH). This survey aims at identifying recommended strategies for work-up, surgical therapy, and postoperative follow-up using Delphi methodology.MethodsWe conducted a 2-round, 33-question, web-based Delphi survey on perioperative management (preoperative work-up, surgical procedure and follow-up) of non-revisional, elective pHH among European surgeons with expertise in upper-GI. Responses were graded on a 5-point Likert scale and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Items from the questionnaire were defined as "recommended" or "discouraged" if positive or negative concordance among participants was > 75%. Items with lower concordance levels were labelled "acceptable" (neither recommended nor discouraged).ResultsSeventy-two surgeons with a median (IQR) experience of 23 (14-30) years from 17 European countries participated (response rate 60%). The annual median (IQR) individual and institutional caseload was 25 (15-36) and 40 (28-60) pHH-surgeries, respectively. After Delphi round 2, "recommended" strategies were defined for preoperative work-up (endoscopy), indication for surgery (typical symptoms and/or chronic anemia), surgical dissection (hernia sac dissection and resection, preservation of the vagal nerves, crural fascia and pleura, resection of retrocardial lipoma) and reconstruction (posterior crurorrhaphy with single stitches, lower esophageal sphincter augmentation (Nissen or Toupet), and postoperative follow-up (contrast radiography). In addition, we identified "discouraged" strategies for preoperative work-up (endosonography), and surgical reconstruction (crurorrhaphy with running sutures, tension-free hiatus repair with mesh only). In contrast, many items from the questionnaire including most details of mesh augmentation (indication, material, shape, placement, and fixation technique) were "acceptable".ConclusionsThis multinational European Delphi survey represents the first expert-led process to identify recommended strategies for the management of pHH. Our work may be useful in clinical practice to guide the diagnostic process, increase procedural consistency and standardization, and to foster collaborative research.
| S-EPMC10234895 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRecent developments in esophageal cancer treatment, including studies exploring active surveillance following chemoradiotherapy, have led to a need for clear terminology and definitions regarding different multimodal treatment options.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to reach worldwide consensus on the definitions and semantics of multimodal esophageal cancer treatment.MethodsIn total, 72 experts working in the field of multimodal esophageal cancer treatment were invited to participate in this Delphi study. The study comprised three Delphi surveys sent out by email and one online meeting. Input for the Delphi survey consisted of terminology obtained from a systematic literature search. Participants were asked to respond to open questions and to indicate whether they agreed or disagreed with different statements. Consensus was reached when there was ≥75% agreement among respondents.ResultsForty-nine of 72 invited experts (68.1%) participated in the first online Delphi survey, 45 (62.5%) in the second survey, 21 (46.7%) of 45 in the online meeting, and 39 (86.7%) of 45 in the final survey. Consensus on neoadjuvant and definitive chemoradiotherapy with or without surgery was reached for 27 of 31 items (87%). No consensus was reached on follow-up after treatment with definitive chemoradiotherapy.Conclusion(s)Consensus was reached on most statements regarding terminology and definitions of multimodal esophageal cancer treatment. Implementing uniform criteria facilitates comparison of studies and promotes international research collaborations.
| S-EPMC11236823 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionApproaches to economic evaluations of stroke therapies are varied and inconsistently described. An objective of the European Stroke Organisation (ESO) Health Economics Working Group is to standardise and improve the economic evaluations of interventions for stroke.MethodsThe ESO Health Economics Working Group and additional experts were contacted to develop a protocol and a guidance document for data collection for economic evaluations of stroke therapies. A modified Delphi approach, including a survey and consensus processes, was used to agree on content. We also asked the participants about resources that could be shared to improve economic evaluations of interventions for stroke.ResultsOf 28 experts invited, 16 (57%) completed the initial survey, with representation from universities, government, and industry. More than half of the survey respondents endorsed 13 specific items to include in a standard resource use questionnaire. Preferred functional/quality of life outcome measures to use for economic evaluations were the modified Rankin Scale (14 respondents, 88%) and the EQ-5D instrument (11 respondents, 69%). Of the 12 respondents who had access to data used in economic evaluations, 10 (83%) indicated a willingness to share data. A protocol template and a guidance document for data collection were developed and are presented in this article.ConclusionThe protocol template and guidance document for data collection will support a more standardised and transparent approach for economic evaluations of stroke care.
| S-EPMC7313366 | biostudies-literature