User menu

Accès à distance ? S'identifier sur le proxy UCLouvain

Comparison of three instruments assessing the quality of economic evaluations: A practical exercise on economic evaluations of the surgical treatment of obesity.

Primary tabs

Gerkens, Sophie [UCL] Crott, Ralph Cleemput, Irina Thissen, Jean-Paul [UCL] Closon, Marie-Christine [UCL] Horsmans, Yves [UCL] Beguin, Claire

Objectives: The increasing use of full economic evaluations has led to the development of various instruments to assess their quality. The purpose of this study was to compare the frequently used British Medical Journal (BMJ) check-list and two new instruments: the Consensus Health Economic Criteria (CHEC) list and the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument. The analysis was based on a practical exercise on economic evaluations of the surgical treatment of obesity.Methods: The quality of nine selected studies was assessed independently by two health economists. To compare instruments, the Spearman rank correlation coefficient was calculated for each assessor. Moreover, the test-retest reliability for each instrument was assessed with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) (3,1). Finally, the inter-rater agreement for each instrument was estimated at two levels: comparison of the total score of each article by the ICC(2,1) and comparison of results per item by kappa values.Results: The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient between instruments was usually high (rho > 0.70). Furthermore, test-retest reliability was good for every instruments, that is, 0.98 (95 percent CI, 0.86-0.99) for the BMJ check-list, 0.97 (95 percent CI, 0.73-0.98) for the CHEC list, and 0.95 (95 percent CI, 0.75-0.99) for the QHES instrument. However, inter-rater agreement was poor (kappa < 0.40 for most items and ICC(2,1)

Document type Article de périodique (Journal article) – Comparative Study, Journal Article
Access type Accès restreint
Publication date 2008
Journal information "International journal of technology assessment in health care" - Vol. 24, no. 3, p. 318-25 (2008)
Peer reviewed yes
issn 0266-4623
Publication status Publié
Affiliations UCL - MD/ESP - Ecole de santé publique
UCL - MD/MINT - Département de médecine interne
UCL - MD/FSIO - Département de physiologie et pharmacologie
UCL - (SLuc) Service d'endocrinologie et de nutrition
UCL - (SLuc) Service d'hépato-gastro-entérologie
MESH Subject Questionnaires ; Humans ; Evaluation Studies as Topic ; Cost-Benefit Analysis - methods - standards ; Bariatrics - economics
Links
  1. Ågren Göran, Narbro Kristina, Jonsson Egon, Näslund Ingmar, Sjöström Lars, Peltonen Markku, Cost of In-Patient Care over 7 Years among Surgically and Conventionally Treated Obese Patients, 10.1038/oby.2002.173
  2. Ament, Evidence-based health economics. From effectiveness to efficiency in systematic review, 99 (2002)
  3. Chevallier J.-M., Daoud F., Szwarcensztein K., Volcot M.F., Rupprecht M.F, Évaluation médicoéconomique du traitement de l'obésité morbide par anneau gastrique ajustable suédois (SAGB), 10.1016/j.anchir.2005.09.014
  4. Chiou Chiun-Fang, Hay Joel W., Wallace Joel F., Bloom Bernard S., Neumann Peter J., Sullivan Sean D., Yu Hsing-Ting, Keeler Emmett B., Henning James M., Ofman Joshua J., Development and Validation of a Grading System for the Quality of Cost-Effectiveness Studies : , 10.1097/00005650-200301000-00007
  5. Christou Nicolas V., Sampalis John S., Liberman Moishe, Look Didier, Auger Stephane, McLean Alexander P.H., MacLean Lloyd D., Surgery Decreases Long-term Mortality, Morbidity, and Health Care Use in Morbidly Obese Patients : , 10.1097/01.sla.0000137343.63376.19
  6. Clegg A.J., Colquitt J., Sidhu M.K., Royle P., Loveman E., Walker A., The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of surgery for people with morbid obesity: a systematic review and economic evaluation, 10.3310/hta6120
  7. Craig Benjamin M, Tseng Daniel S, Cost-effectiveness of gastric bypass for severe obesity, 10.1016/s0002-9343(02)01266-4
  8. Drummond M F, Jefferson T O, Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ, 10.1136/bmj.313.7052.275
  9. Drummond, Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes (2005)
  10. Evers, Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 21, 240 (2005)
  11. Fleiss, Statistical methods for rates and proportions (1981)
  12. Jefferson Tom, Quality of Systematic Reviews of Economic Evaluations in Health Care, 10.1001/jama.287.21.2809
  13. Lambert, Pharmacological and surgical treatment of obesity. Residential care for severely obese children in Belgium (2006)
  14. Landis J. Richard, Koch Gary G., The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data, 10.2307/2529310
  15. Martin Louis F., Tan Tjiauw-Ling, Horn John R., Bixler Edward O, Kauffman Gordon L., Becker Dolores A., Hunter Saundra MacD., Comparison of the costs associated with medical and surgical treatment of obesity, 10.1016/s0039-6060(05)80024-8
  16. Nguyen Ninh T., Goldman Charles, Rosenquist C. John, Arango Andres, Cole Carol J., Lee Steven J., Wolfe Bruce M., Laparoscopic Versus Open Gastric Bypass: A Randomized Study of Outcomes, Quality of Life, and Costs : , 10.1097/00000658-200109000-00002
  17. Shrout Patrick E., Fleiss Joseph L., Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability., 10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420
  18. van Gemert W. G., Adang E.M.M., Kop M., Vos G., Greve J.W.M., Soeters P.B., A Prospective Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Vertical Banded Gastroplasty for the Treatment of Morbid Obesity, 10.1381/096089299765552792
  19. van Mastrigt Ghislaine, van Dielen Francois, Severens Johan, Voss Gemma, Greve Jan, One-Year Cost-Effectiveness of Surgical Treatment of Morbid Obesity: Vertical Banded Gastroplasty versus Lap-Band®, 10.1381/096089206775222113
  20. Whitman, J Nurs Educ, 29, 377 (1990)
Bibliographic reference Gerkens, Sophie ; Crott, Ralph ; Cleemput, Irina ; Thissen, Jean-Paul ; Closon, Marie-Christine ; et. al. Comparison of three instruments assessing the quality of economic evaluations: A practical exercise on economic evaluations of the surgical treatment of obesity.. In: International journal of technology assessment in health care, Vol. 24, no. 3, p. 318-25 (2008)
Permanent URL http://hdl.handle.net/2078.1/14100