Table 4.
Quality evaluation of included pharmacoeconomic studies.
| Items | Study | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lin WS 2004[25] | Zhang GX 2010[26] | Li G 2013[27] | Men P 2016[28] | He X 2017[29] | Strilciuc S 2023[30] | ||
| 1. Title | PC | PC | C | C | C | C | |
| 2. Abstract | C | C | C | C | C | C | |
| 3. Background and objectives | PC | PC | PC | C | C | C | |
| 4. Health economic analysis plan | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | |
| 5. Study population | C | C | C | C | C | NR | |
| 6. Setting and location | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | C | |
| 7. Comparators | PC | PC | PC | PC | PC | C | |
| 8. Perspective | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | PC | |
| 9. Time horizon | PC | PC | PC | PC | PC | PC | |
| 10. Discount rate | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | PC | |
| 11. Selection of outcomes | PC | PC | C | PC | PC | PC | |
| 12. Measurement of outcomes | C | C | C | C | C | C | |
| 13. Valuation of outcomes | C | C | NR | NR | C | C | |
| 14. Measurement and valuation of resources and costs | C | C | NR | C | C | C | |
| 15. Currency, price date, and conversion | PC | NR | NR | NR | NR | C | |
| 16. Rationale and description of model | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | |
| 17. Analytics and assumptions | C | C | C | C | C | C | |
| 18. Characterizing heterogeneity | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | |
| 19. Characterizing distributional effects | NA | NA | NA | NA | PC | NA | |
| 20. Characterizing uncertainty | C | NR | NR | C | C | C | |
| 21. Approach to engagement with patients and others affected by the study | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | |
| 22. Study parameters | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | |
| 23. Summary of main results | C | C | C | C | C | C | |
| 24. Effect of uncertainty | PC | PC | NR | PC | PC | PC | |
| 25. Effect of engagement with patients and others affected by the study | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | |
| 26. Study findings, limitations, generalizability, and current knowledge | PC | C | PC | C | C | C | |
| 27. Source of funding | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | C | |
| 28. Conflicts of interest | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | C | |
| Score | The complete coincidence rate | 38.1% | 38.1% | 28.6% | 47.6% | 50.0% | 68.2% |
| The total coincidence rate | 76.2% | 66.7% | 52.4% | 66.7% | 72.7% | 90.9% | |
Conducted (C): The report content adheres to the standard of a specific item on the CHEERS 2022 checklist; Partially conducted (PC): The report content is not comprehensive and partially adheres to the standard of a specific item on the CHEERS 2022 checklist; Not reported (NR): The report content does not comply with the standard of a specific item on the CHEERS 2022 checklist; Not applicable (NA): The content of the report does not relate to the standard of a specific item on the CHEERS 2022 checklist and the content does not apply to an item.