Table 3.
Number of studies fulfilling each Consensus on Health Economic Criteria (CHEC-list) quality criterion
| CHEC-list quality criteria | Number of studies fulfilling criterion |
|---|---|
| 1. Is the study population clearly described? |
12 |
| 2. Are competing alternatives clearly described? |
14 |
| 3. Is a well-defined research question posed in answerable form? |
15 |
| 4. Is the economic study design appropriate to the stated objective? |
15 |
| 5. Is the chosen time horizon appropriate in order to include relevant costs and consequences? |
15 |
| 6. Is the actual perspective chosen appropriate? |
3 |
| 7. Are all important and relevant costs for each alternative identified? |
0 |
| 8. Are all costs measured appropriately in physical units? |
11 |
| 9. Are costs valued appropriately? |
4 |
| 10. Are all important and relevant outcomes for each alternative identified? |
15 |
| 11. Are all outcomes measured appropriately? |
13 |
| 12. Are outcomes valued appropriately? |
13 |
| 13. Is an incremental analysis of costs and outcomes of alternatives performed? |
3 |
| 14. Are all future costs and outcomes discounted appropriately? |
2 |
| 15. Are all important variables, whose values are uncertain, appropriately subjected to sensitivity analysis? |
3 |
| 16. Do the conclusions follow from the data reported? |
9 |
| 17. Does the study discuss the generalizability of the results to other settings and patient/client groups? |
2 |
| 18. Does the article indicate there is no potential conflict of interest of study researcher(s) and funder(s)? |
4 |
| 19. Are ethical and distributional issues discussed appropriately? | 0 |