IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v27y2009i11p919-929.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Barriers to Generalizability of Health Economic Evaluations in Latin America and the Caribbean Region

Author

Listed:
  • Federico Augustovski
  • Cynthia Iglesias
  • Andrea Manca
  • Michael Drummond
  • Adolfo Rubinstein
  • Sebastián Martií

Abstract

Use and acceptance of health economic evaluations (HEEs) has been much greater in developed than in developing nations. Nevertheless, while developing countries lag behind in the development of HEE methods, they could benefit from the progress made in other countries and concentrate on ways in which existing methods can be used or would need to be modified to fulfill their specific needs. HEEs, as context-specific tools, are not easily generalizable from setting to setting. Existing studies regarding generalizability and transferability of HEEs have primarily been conducted in developed countries. Therefore, a legitimate question for policy makers in Latin America and the Caribbean region (LAC) is to what extent HEEs conducted in industrialized economies and in LAC are generalizable to LAC (trans-regional) and to other LAC countries (intra-regional), respectively. We conducted a systematic review, searching the NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Office of Health Economics Health Economic Evaluation Database (HEED), LILACS (Latin America health bibliographic database) and NEVALAT (Latin American Network on HEE) to identify HEEs published between 1980 and 2004. We included individual patient- and model-based HEEs (cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, cost-benefit and cost-consequences analyses) that involved at least one LAC country. Data were extracted by three independent reviewers using a checklist validated by regional and international experts. From 521 studies retrieved, 72 were full HEEs (39% randomized controlled trials [RCTs], 32% models, 17% non-randomized studies and 12% mixed trialmodeling approach). Over one-third of identified studies did not specifically report the type of HEE. Cost-effectiveness and cost-consequence analyses accounted for almost 80 % of the studies. The three Latin American countries with the highest participation in HEE studies were Brazil, Argentina and Mexico. While we found relatively good standards of reporting the study’s question, population, interventions, comparators and conclusions, the overall reporting was poor, and evidence of unfamiliarity with international guidelines was evident (i.e. absence of incremental analysis, of discounting long-term costs and effects). Analysis or description of place-to-place variability was infrequent. Of the 49 trial-based analyses, 43% were single centre, 33% multinational and 18% multicentre national. Main reporting problems included issues related to sample representativeness, data collection and data analysis. Of the 32 model-based studies (most commonly using epidemiological models), main problems included the inadequacy of search strategy, range selection for sensitivity analysis and theoretical justifications. There are a number of issues associated with the reporting and methodology used in multinational and local HEE studies relevant for LAC that preclude the assessment of their generalizability and potential transferability. Although the quality of reporting and methodology used in model-based HEEs was somewhat higher than those from trial-based HEEs, economic evaluation methodology was usually weak and less developed than the analysis of clinical data. Improving these aspects in LAC HEE studies is paramount to maximizing their potential benefits such as increasing the generalizability/transferability of their results. Copyright Adis Data Information BV 2009

Suggested Citation

  • Federico Augustovski & Cynthia Iglesias & Andrea Manca & Michael Drummond & Adolfo Rubinstein & Sebastián Martií, 2009. "Barriers to Generalizability of Health Economic Evaluations in Latin America and the Caribbean Region," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 27(11), pages 919-929, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:27:y:2009:i:11:p:919-929
    DOI: 10.2165/11313670-000000000-00000
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2165/11313670-000000000-00000
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2165/11313670-000000000-00000?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephanie Boulenger & John Nixon & Michael Drummond & Philippe Ulmann & Stephen Rice & Gerard Pouvourville, 2005. "Can economic evaluations be made more transferable?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 6(4), pages 334-346, December.
    2. Drummond, Michael F. & Sculpher, Mark J. & Torrance, George W. & O'Brien, Bernie J. & Stoddart, Greg L., 2005. "Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 3, number 9780198529453.
    3. John Nixon & Stephen Rice & Michael Drummond & Stephanie Boulenger & Philippe Ulmann & Gerard Pouvourville, 2009. "Guidelines for completing the EURONHEED transferability information checklists," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 10(2), pages 157-165, May.
    4. Editors The, 2007. "From the Editors," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-5, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Catherine Pitt & Catherine Goodman & Kara Hanson, 2016. "Economic Evaluation in Global Perspective: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Recent Literature," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(S1), pages 9-28, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fernando Antoñanzas & Roberto Rodríguez-Ibeas & Carmelo Juárez-Castelló, 2012. "Coping with uncertainty on health decisions: assessing new solutions," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(4), pages 375-378, August.
    2. Pepijn Vemer & Maureen Rutten-van Mölken, 2011. "Largely ignored: the impact of the threshold value for a QALY on the importance of a transferability factor," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 12(5), pages 397-404, October.
    3. Elisabet Jacobsen & Dwayne Boyers & Alison Avenell, 2020. "Challenges of Systematic Reviews of Economic Evaluations: A Review of Recent Reviews and an Obesity Case Study," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 259-267, March.
    4. SeungJin Bae & Eun Bae & Sang Lim, 2014. "Sourcing Quality-of-Life Weights Obtained from Previous Studies: Theory and Reality in Korea," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 7(2), pages 141-150, June.
    5. Valentin Brodszky & Zsuzsanna Beretzky & Petra Baji & Fanni Rencz & Márta Péntek & Alexandru Rotar & Konstantin Tachkov & Susanne Mayer & Judit Simon & Maciej Niewada & Rok Hren & László Gulácsi, 2019. "Cost-of-illness studies in nine Central and Eastern European countries," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(1), pages 155-172, June.
    6. Eloi Laurent, 2010. "Environmental justice and environmental inequalities: A European perspective," Working Papers hal-01069412, HAL.
    7. Paal Joranger & Arild Nesbakken & Halfdan Sorbye & Geir Hoff & Arne Oshaug & Eline Aas, 2020. "Survival and costs of colorectal cancer treatment and effects of changing treatment strategies: a model approach," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(3), pages 321-334, April.
    8. Saha, Sanjib & Gerdtham, Ulf-G. & Toresson, Håkan & Minthon, Lennart & Jarl, Johan, 2018. "Economic Evaluation of Interventions for Screening of Dementia," Working Papers 2018:20, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    9. Mark Oppe & Daniela Ortín-Sulbarán & Carlos Vila Silván & Anabel Estévez-Carrillo & Juan M. Ramos-Goñi, 2021. "Cost-effectiveness of adding Sativex® spray to spasticity care in Belgium: using bootstrapping instead of Monte Carlo simulation for probabilistic sensitivity analyses," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(5), pages 711-721, July.
    10. Laurence M. Djatche & Stefan Varga & Robert D. Lieberthal, 2018. "Cost-Effectiveness of Aspirin Adherence for Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 371-380, December.
    11. Sylvester Ngome Chisika & Chunho Yeom, 2021. "Enhancing Sustainable Management of Public Natural Forests Through Public Private Partnerships in Kenya," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, October.
    12. Laurent, Catherine E. & Berriet-Solliec, Marielle & Kirsch, Marc & Labarthe, Pierre & Trouve, Aurelie, 2010. "Multifunctionality Of Agriculture, Public Policies And Scientific Evidences: Some Critical Issues Of Contemporary Controversies," APSTRACT: Applied Studies in Agribusiness and Commerce, AGRIMBA, vol. 4(1-2), pages 1-6.
    13. Juan Carlos Conesa & Timothy J. Kehoe & Kim J. Ruhl, 2007. "Modeling great depressions: the depression in Finland in the 1990s," Quarterly Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, vol. 31(Nov), pages 16-44.
    14. Ties Hoomans & Johan Severens & Nicole Roer & Gepke Delwel, 2012. "Methodological Quality of Economic Evaluations of New Pharmaceuticals in the Netherlands," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 219-227, March.
    15. Fabio Salamanca-Buentello & Mary V Seeman & Abdallah S Daar & Ross E G Upshur, 2020. "The ethical, social, and cultural dimensions of screening for mental health in children and adolescents of the developing world," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-25, August.
    16. Khan, Md. Tajuddin & Kishore, Avinash & Joshi, Pramod Kumar, 2016. "Gender dimensions on farmers’ preferences for direct-seeded rice with drum seeder in India:," IFPRI discussion papers 1550, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    17. Noémi Kreif & Richard Grieve & M. Zia Sadique, 2013. "Statistical Methods For Cost‐Effectiveness Analyses That Use Observational Data: A Critical Appraisal Tool And Review Of Current Practice," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(4), pages 486-500, April.
    18. Barbara Graaff & Lei Si & Amanda L. Neil & Kwang Chien Yee & Kristy Sanderson & Lyle C. Gurrin & Andrew J. Palmer, 2017. "Population Screening for Hereditary Haemochromatosis in Australia: Construction and Validation of a State-Transition Cost-Effectiveness Model," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 37-51, March.
    19. Adilson Carlos Yoshikuni & José Eduardo Ricciardi Favaretto & Alberto Luiz Albertin & Fernando de Souza Meirelles, 2022. "How can Strategy-as-Practice Enable Innovation under the Influence of Environmental Dynamism?," RAC - Revista de Administração Contemporânea (Journal of Contemporary Administration), ANPAD - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração, vol. 26(1), pages 200131-2001.
    20. Christopher Fitzpatrick & Katherine Floyd, 2012. "A Systematic Review of the Cost and Cost Effectiveness of Treatment for Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 63-80, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:27:y:2009:i:11:p:919-929. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.