Table 2.

Overview of the quality of included publications according to the CHEERS checklist

Item no.	Item	Description	Publication response (n)a				Publication response (%)b
			True	False	Unclear	NA	True	False	Unclear	NA
Title and abstract
1	Title	Identify the study as an economic evaluation, or use more specific terms such as ‘cost-effectiveness analysis’ and describe the interventions compared	63a	0	0	0	100	0	0	0
2	Abstract	Provide a structured summary of objectives, perspective, setting, methods (including study design and inputs), results (including base-case and uncertainty analyses), and conclusions	54	1	0	8	86	2	0	12
Introduction
3	Background and objectives	Provide an explicit statement of the broader context for the study. Present the study question and its relevance for health policy or practice decisions	63	0	0	0	100	0	0	0
Methods
4	Target population and subgroups	Describe characteristics of the base-case population and subgroups analysed, including why they were chosen	62	0	1	0	98	2	0	0
5	Setting and location	State relevant aspects of the system(s) in which the decision(s) need(s) to be made	60	0	3	0	95	5	0	0
6	Study perspective	Describe the perspective of the study and relate this to the costs being evaluated	58	0	5	0	92	0	8	0
7	Comparators	Describe the interventions or strategies being compared and state why they were chosen	63	0	0	0	100	0	0	0
8	Time horizon	State the time horizon(s) over which costs and consequences are being evaluated and say why appropriate	63	0	0	0	100	0	0	0
9	Discount rate	Report the choice of discount rate(s) used for costs and outcomes and say why appropriate	57	6	0	0	91	9	0	0
10	Choice of health outcomes	Describe what outcomes were used as the measure(s) of benefit in the evaluation and their relevance for the type of analysis performed	63	0	0	0	100	0	0	0
11a	Measurement of effectiveness	Single-study-based estimates: Describe fully the design features of the single effectiveness study and why the single study was a sufficient source of clinical-effectiveness data	31	0	0	32	49	0	0	51
11b		Synthesis-based estimates: Describe fully the methods used for the identification of included studies and synthesis of clinical-effectiveness data	31	1	0	31	49	2	0	49
12	Measurement and valuation of preference-based outcomes	If applicable, describe the population and methods used to elicit preferences for outcomes	25	6	2	30	40	9	3	48
13a	Estimating resources and costs	Single-study-based economic evaluation: Describe approaches used to estimate resource use associated with the alternative interventions. Describe primary or secondary research methods for valuing each resource item in terms of its unit cost. Describe any adjustments made to approximate to opportunity costs	22	1	0	40	35	2	0	63
13b		Model-based economic evaluation: Describe approaches and data sources used to estimate resource use associated with model health states. Describe primary or secondary research methods for valuing each resource item in terms of its unit cost. Describe any adjustments made to approximate to opportunity costs	35	0	5	23	55	0	8	37
14	Currency, price date, and conversion	Report the dates of the estimated resource quantities and unit costs. Describe methods for adjusting estimated unit costs to the year of reported costs, if necessary. Describe methods for converting costs into a common currency base and the exchange rate	56	1	6	0	89	2	9	0
15	Choice of model	Describe and give reasons for the specific type of decision analytic model used. Providing a figure to show model structure is strongly recommended	56	7	0	0	89	11	0	0
16	Assumptions	Describe all structural or other assumptions underpinning the decision analytic model	58	0	5	0	92	0	8	0
17	Analytic methods	Describe all analytic methods supporting the evaluation. This could include methods for dealing with skewed, missing or censored data; extrapolation methods; methods for pooling data; approaches to validate or make adjustments (e.g. half-cycle corrections) to a model; and methods for handling population heterogeneity and uncertainty	51	3	9	0	81	5	14	0
Results
18	Study parameters	Report the values, ranges, references and, if used, probability distributions for all parameters. Report reasons or sources for distributions used to represent uncertainty where appropriate. Providing a table to show the input values is strongly recommended	55	1	7	0	87	2	11	0
19	Incremental costs and outcomes	For each intervention, report mean values for the main categories of estimated costs and outcomes of interest, as well as mean differences between the comparator groups. If applicable, report incremental cost-effectiveness ratios	61	0	2	0	97	0	3	0
20a	Characterizing uncertainty	Single-study-based economic evaluation: Describe the effects of sampling uncertainty for estimated incremental cost, incremental effectiveness, and incremental cost effectiveness, together with the impact of methodological assumptions (such as discount rate, study perspective)	22	0	1	40	35	0	2	63
20b		Model-based economic evaluation: Describe the effects on the results of uncertainty for all input parameters, and uncertainty related to the structure of the model and assumptions	36	3	1	23	56	5	2	37
21	Characterizing heterogeneity	If applicable, report differences in costs, outcomes or cost effectiveness that can be explained by variations between subgroups of patients with different baseline characteristics or other observed variability in effects that are not reducible by more information	38	15	10	0	60	24	16	0
Discussion
22	Study findings, limitations, generalizability, and current knowledge	Summarize key study findings and describe how they support the conclusions reached. Discuss limitations and the generalizability of the findings and how the findings fit with current knowledge	54	3	6	0	86	5	9	0
Other
23	Source of funding	Describe how the study was funded and the role of the funder in the identification, design, conduct and reporting of the analysis. Describe other nonmonetary sources of support	46	11	0	6	73	17	0	10
24	Conflicts of interest	Describe any potential for conflict of interest among study contributors in accordance with journal policy. In the absence of a journal policy, we recommend authors comply with International Committee of Medical Journal Editors’ recommendations	46	8	1	8	73	13	2	12

CHEERS Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards

^aTotal n assessed by checklist was 63; one publication was unavailable in English [73]

^bThe publication number (n = 63) included in this quality assessment was used as the denominator for completeness of study information