2026-04-27T07:53:35Zhttps://repisalud.isciii.es/rest/oai/request

oai:repisalud.isciii.es:20.500.12105/173852024-11-29T09:19:26Zcom_20.500.12105_2052com_20.500.12105_2051com_20.500.12105_15322col_20.500.12105_19613col_20.500.12105_16973col_20.500.12105_16984

00925njm 22002777a 4500 dc Catalá-López, Ferrán author Ridao, Manuel author Tejedor Romero, Laura author Caulley, Lisa author Hutton, Brian author Husereau, Don author Alonso-Arroyo, Adolfo author Bernal-Delgado, Enrique author Drummond, Michael F author Moher, David author 2024-01 Objectives: To investigate the extent to which articles of economic evaluations of healthcare interventions indexed in MEDLINE incorporate research practices that promote transparency, openness, and reproducibility. Study design and setting: We evaluated a random sample of health economic evaluations indexed in MEDLINE during 2019. We included articles written in English reporting an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in terms of costs per life years gained, quality-adjusted life years, and/or disability-adjusted life years. Reproducible research practices, openness, and transparency in each article were extracted in duplicate. We explored whether reproducible research practices were associated with self-report use of a guideline. Results: We included 200 studies published in 147 journals. Almost half were published as open access articles (n = 93; 47%). Most studies (n = 150; 75%) were model-based economic evaluations. In 109 (55%) studies, authors self-reported use a guideline (e.g., for study conduct or reporting). Few studies (n = 31; 16%) reported working from a protocol. In 112 (56%) studies, authors reported the data needed to recreate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the base case analysis. This percentage was higher in studies using a guideline than studies not using a guideline (72/109 [66%] with guideline vs. 40/91 [44%] without guideline; risk ratio 1.50, 95% confidence interval 1.15-1.97). Only 10 (5%) studies mentioned access to raw data and analytic code for reanalyses. Conclusion: Transparency, openness, and reproducible research practices are frequently underused in health economic evaluations. This study provides baseline data to compare future progress in the field. J Clin Epidemiol. 2024:165:111208. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12105/17385 37939742 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.10.024 1878-5921 Journal of clinical epidemiology Cost-effectiveness analysis Data sharing Economic evaluation Methodology Quality Reporting Reproducibility Transparency, openness, and reproducible research practices are frequently underused in health economic evaluations