TABLE I.
Potential items for abstracts of economic analyses in oncology
| Potential abstract item | Average expert rating |
|---|---|
| Background and rationale of the cost problem | 3.80 |
| Type of cost analysis (for example, cea, cua, cba) | 4.63 |
| Description of intervention | 4.54 |
| Description of comparator | 4.57 |
| How and why this particular comparator was selected | 3.06 |
| Target population for the intervention | 4.23 |
| Time horizon | 4.04 |
| Perspective of the cost analysis | 4.00 |
| The costs that were included | 3.61 |
| How the cost data were derived | 3.04 |
| How the denominator was measured (for example, utility/qaly/daly) | 4.33 |
| Actual cost-effectiveness or cost–utility ratios (for example, $100,000/lyg) | 4.41 |
| Use of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios | 4.04 |
| Whether sensitivity analyses were conducted | 3.58 |
| Type of sensitivity analyses (for example, deterministic, probabilistic) | 3.25 |
| Whether a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve was derived | 2.56 |
| A prior definition of budget threshold | 2.67 |
| Concluding statement and interpretation of cost-effectiveness | 4.15 |
| Source of funding | 3.33 |
| Location and setting of the study | 3.67 |
| Currency (for example, CA$/US$) | 4.15 |
| Whether discounting was used | 3.69 |
| Base year of cost adjustment | 3.25 |
| Limitations of the analysis | 3.30 |
cea = cost-effectiveness analysis; cua = cost–utility analysis; cba = cost–benefit analysis; qaly = quality-adjusted life year; daly = disability-adjusted life year; lyg = life-year gained.