Table 6.

Quality assessment of 34 reviewed cost-effectiveness studies

Author	(1) Was a well-defined question posed in answerable form?	(2) Did the study examine both costs and effects of the service or programme?	(3) Did the study involve a comparison of alternatives?	(4) Was a viewpoint for the analysis stated?	(5) Was a do-nothing alternative considered?	(6) Were the capital costs, as well as operating costs, included?	(7) Were the cost and consequences valued credibly?	(8) Were currencies updated and converted clearly and appropriately?	(9) Were costs and consequences that occur in the future discounted to their present value?	(10) Was there any justification given for the discount rate used?	(11) Were the incremental costs generated by one alternative over another compared with the additional effects generated?	(12) Was a sensitivity analysis performed?	(13) Did the study discuss the generalisability of the results to other setting and patient/client groups?	Total score (out of 13 equally weighted)	Type of study design
Alefan	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	7	Longitudinal
Amira	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	No	3	Cross-sectional
Anchala et al47	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	10	RCT
Anderson, AN	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	7	Cross-sectional
Augustovski et al28	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	11	RCT
Bai et al21	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	No	Yes	5	Longitudinal
Basu et al33	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	9	Modelled
Cazarim24	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	7	Longitudinal
Chen et al46	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	9	Modelled
Das	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	2	Longitudinal
Edwards	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	4	Longitudinal
Ekwunife et al42	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	10	Modelled
Gad et al38	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	11	Modelled
Gaziano et al34	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	10	Modelled
Gu et al31	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	10	Modelled
Ha36	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	11	Modelled
He	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	10	RCT
Ilesanmi	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	4	Cross-sectional
Jafar et al22	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	12	RCT
Jiang	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	No	3	Cross-sectional
Khonputsa et al39	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No	9	Modelled
Krishnan et al43	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	10	Modelled
Lung et al40	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No	8	Modelled
Makkink	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	3	Retrospective cohort study
Murray et al13	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	11	Modelled
Ngalesoni et al45	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	10	Modelled
Nguyen et al37	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No	9	Modelled
Ortegon	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	11	Modelled
Pandey	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	No	5	Modelled
Pannarunothaai	No	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	No	3	Retrospective cohort study
Patel	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	2	RCT
Perman	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	13	Modelled
Praveen et al49	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	7	RCT
Robberstad et al35	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	10	Modelled
Rosendaal et al44	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	11	Modelled
Rubinstein et al29	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	11	Modelled
Tolla et al41	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	11	Modelled
Tsuji	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	5	Longitudinal
Verguet	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	No	6	Modelled
Wang, Xin et al48	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	No	No	7	RCT
Wang, Zengwu	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	5	Longitudinal
Xie et al32	No	Yes	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	7	Modelled

RCT, randomised controlled trial.