Next Article in Journal
Changes in Microbial Community Structures under Reclaimed Water Replenishment Conditions
Previous Article in Journal
Facilitating Eudaimonic Well-Being in Mental Health Care Organizations: The Role of Servant Leadership and Workplace Civility Climate
Open AccessReview

Economic Evaluations Informed Exclusively by Real World Data: A Systematic Review

1
Teaching, Research & Innovation Unit, Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu–Institut de Recerca Sant Joan de Déu, 08830 Barcelona, Spain
2
Primary Care Prevention and Health Promotion Network (redIAPP), 08007 Barcelona, Spain
3
CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), 28029 Madrid, Spain
4
Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Icesi, 760030 Cali, Colombia
5
Institut Universitari d’Investigació en Atenció Primària Jordi Gol (IDIAPJGol), 08007 Barcelona, Spain
6
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), Spain
7
Health Science School, Universitat de Girona, 17071 Girona, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(4), 1171; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17041171
Received: 9 January 2020 / Revised: 3 February 2020 / Accepted: 8 February 2020 / Published: 12 February 2020
Economic evaluations using Real World Data (RWD) has been increasing in the very recent years, however, this source of information has several advantages and limitations. The aim of this review was to assess the quality of full economic evaluations (EE) developed using RWD. A systematic review was carried out through articles from the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Included were studies that employed RWD for both costs and effectiveness. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Of the 14,011 studies identified, 93 were included. Roughly half of the studies were carried out in a hospital setting. The most frequently assessed illnesses were neoplasms while the most evaluated interventions were pharmacological. The main source of costs and effects of RWD were information systems. The most frequent clinical outcome was survival. Some 47% of studies met at least 80% of CHEERS criteria. Studies were conducted with samples of 100–1000 patients or more, were randomized, and those that reported bias controls were those that fulfilled most CHEERS criteria. In conclusion, fewer than half the studies met 80% of the CHEERS checklist criteria. View Full-Text
Keywords: economic evaluation; systematic review; real world data; real world evidence; electronic health records economic evaluation; systematic review; real world data; real world evidence; electronic health records
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Parody-Rúa, E.; Rubio-Valera, M.; Guevara-Cuellar, C.; Gómez-Lumbreras, A.; Casajuana-Closas, M.; Carbonell-Duacastella, C.; Aznar-Lou, I. Economic Evaluations Informed Exclusively by Real World Data: A Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1171.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop