Critical Appraisal of Systematic Reviews With Costs and Cost-Effectiveness Outcomes: An ISPOR Good Practices Task Force Report

• Published in: Value in health 2021-04, Vol.24 (4), p.463-472
• Main Authors: Mandrik, Olena (Lena), Severens, J.L. (Hans), Bardach, Ariel, Ghabri, Salah, Hamel, Candyce, Mathes, Tim, Vale, Luke, Wisløff, Torbjørn, Goldhaber-Fiebert, Jeremy D.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Best practice; Cost analysis; Decision makers; Decision making; Health economics; Health status; Mental task performance; Reliability; Systematic review; Task forces; Usefulness
• ISSN: 1098-3015; 1524-4733
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2021.01.002

A systematic review (SR) can provide rigorous and complete evidence to support decision makers who consider both the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of health interventions. Making universal recommendations for SR-CCEOs is difficult because they differ in several important aspects, in particular, with regard to their search and inclusion criteria. Overall, SR-CCEO reliability and usefulness will improve with good practice guidance for SR-CCEOs with different objectives. Thus, ISPOR (The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research) established a global, multistakeholder, multidisciplinary expert task force to address this need (Appendix 1 in Supplemental Materials found at https://doi.org/10.10l6/j-jval.2021.01.002). This report which includes the ISPOR Criteria for Cost(-Effectiveness) Review Outcomes (CiCERO) Checklist, will assist researchers, producers of health technologies, and evidence users (decision makers/commissioners). The task force categorized the recommendations according to the 6 stages of conducting an SR-CCEO.