Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study is to illustrate how structured abstracts in the NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), now part of the Cochrane Library, may be used as part of the systematic review process. The need for reviewers to have access to structured and critical summaries of economic evaluations is particularly pertinent in the light of recent trends in many countries to include an analysis of cost-effectiveness in addition to clinical effectiveness for reviews now being commissioned.
Methods: The area of mental health was chosen as it is the subject of current interest in the NHS and a systematic review is being undertaken by the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (NHS CRD). Within this overall topic area, the specific question of whether assertive community outreach treatment is more cost-effective than standard case management for those with severe mental illness was used. NHS EED was searched in order to locate published economic evaluations on this topic.
Results: Three studies of relevance to the question were located. The way in which the search strategy was derived, how to access and use NHS EED via the Internet or through the Cochrane Library is explained in conjunction with one of the structured NHS EED abstracts. Finally, the way in which NHS EED abstracts can be utilised within a systematic review is briefly discussed.
Conclusions: Greater emphasis and importance is now being placed on cost-effectiveness information as part of the systematic review process. As such, those undertaking reviews need to locate and critically summarise the results of relevant economic evaluations for interventions in the clinical area being reviewed. NHS EED is commissioned by the NHS R&D programme to locate economic evaluations in the literature and summarise and critically appraise the findings. It is therefore a resource that researchers should be aware of and use as part of the systematic review process. NHS EED abstracts may also contribute towards refining the methodology of summarising the findings of economic evaluations within the systematic review process.
Methods: The area of mental health was chosen as it is the subject of current interest in the NHS and a systematic review is being undertaken by the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (NHS CRD). Within this overall topic area, the specific question of whether assertive community outreach treatment is more cost-effective than standard case management for those with severe mental illness was used. NHS EED was searched in order to locate published economic evaluations on this topic.
Results: Three studies of relevance to the question were located. The way in which the search strategy was derived, how to access and use NHS EED via the Internet or through the Cochrane Library is explained in conjunction with one of the structured NHS EED abstracts. Finally, the way in which NHS EED abstracts can be utilised within a systematic review is briefly discussed.
Conclusions: Greater emphasis and importance is now being placed on cost-effectiveness information as part of the systematic review process. As such, those undertaking reviews need to locate and critically summarise the results of relevant economic evaluations for interventions in the clinical area being reviewed. NHS EED is commissioned by the NHS R&D programme to locate economic evaluations in the literature and summarise and critically appraise the findings. It is therefore a resource that researchers should be aware of and use as part of the systematic review process. NHS EED abstracts may also contribute towards refining the methodology of summarising the findings of economic evaluations within the systematic review process.