Table 6.
Summary of QHES instrument dimension scores
| QHES dimension | Average score | Highest possible score | Percentage achieving highest possible score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the study objective presented in a clear, specific and measurable manner? | 6.0 | 7 | 65% |
| Were the perspective of the analysis (societal, thirdparty, payer, etc.) and reasons for its selection stated? | 2.4 | 4 | 28% |
| Were variable estimates used in the analysis from the best available source (i.e. randomised control trial—best, expert opinion—worst)? | 7.4 | 8 | 83% |
| If estimates came from a subgroup analysis, were the groups prespecified at the beginning of the study? | 0.4 | 1 | 33% |
| Was uncertainty handled by (1) statistical analysis to address random events, (2) sensitivity analysis to cover a range of assumptions? | 5.8 | 9 | 33% |
| Was incremental analysis performed between alternatives for resources and costs? | 5.4 | 6 | 94% |
| Was the methodology for data extraction (including the value of health states and other benefits) stated? | 4.0 | 5 | 78% |
| Did the analytic horizon allow time for all relevant and important outcomes? Were benefits and costs that went beyond 1 year discounted (3% to 5%) and justification given for the discount rate? | 4.7 | 7 | 39% |
| Was the measurement of costs appropriate and the methodology for the estimation of quantities and unit costs clearly described? | 3.9 | 8 | 0% |
| Were the primary outcome measure(s) for the economic evaluation clearly stated and did they include the major short-term? Was justification given for the measures/scales used? | 4.7 | 6 | 67% |
| Were the health outcomes measures/scales valid and reliable? If previously tested valid and reliable measures were not available, was justification given for the measures/scales used? | 5.0 | 7 | 72% |
| Were the economic model (including structure), study methods and analysis, and the components of the numerator and denominator displayed in a clear, transparent manner? | 6.7 | 8 | 83% |
| Were the choice of economic model, main assumptions, and limitations of the study stated and justified? | 5.6 | 7 | 78% |
| Did the author(s) explicitly discuss direction and magnitude of potential biases? | 3.9 | 6 | 56% |
| Were the conclusions/recommendations of the study justified and based on the study results? | 8.0 | 8 | 100% |
| Was there a statement disclosing the source of funding for the study? | 2.4 | 3 | 78% |