| V Cost Analysis: Consensus on Health Economic Criteria (CHEC)-List (Evers, Goossens, De Vet, Van Tulder, and Ament, 2005) [28] | Parikh et al. (2020) [61] |
| 1. Is the study population clearly described? | Y |
| 2. Are competing alternatives clearly described? | Y |
| 3. Is a well-defined research question posed in answerable form? | Y |
| 4. Is the economic study design appropriate to the stated objective? | Y |
| 5. Is the chosen time horizon appropriate to include relevant costs and consequences? | Y |
| 6. Is the actual perspective chosen appropriate? | Y |
| 7. Are all important and relevant costs for each alternative identified? | Y |
| 8. Are all costs measured appropriately in physical units? | Y |
| 9. Are costs valued appropriately? | Y |
| 10. Are all important and relevant outcomes for each alternative identified? | NA |
| 11. Are all outcomes measured appropriately? | NA |
| 12. Are outcomes valued appropriately? | NA |
| 13. Is an incremental analysis of costs and outcomes of alternatives performed? | NA |
| 14. Are all future costs and outcomes discounted appropriately? | NA |
| 15. Are all important variables, whose values are uncertain, appropriately subjected to sensitivity analysis? | Y |
| 16. Do the conclusions follow from the data reported? | Y |
| 17. Does the study discuss the generalisability of the results to other settings and patient/client groups? | N |
| 18. Does the article indicate that there is no potential conflict of interest of study researcher(s) and funder(s)? | Y |
| 19. Are (a) ethical and (b) distributional issues discussed appropriately? | (a) N (b) Y |
| N = No, NA = Not applicable, UC = unclear, Y = Yes. | |