Economic evaluation studies in reproductive medicine: A systematic review of methodologic quality

Lobke M. Moolenaar, Sylvia M C Vijgen, Peter Hompes, Fulco Van Der Veen, Ben Willem J Mol, Brent C. Opmeer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the methodologic quality of economic analyses published in the field of reproductive medicine. Design: Systematic review. Setting: Centers for reproductive care. Patient(s): Infertility patients. Intervention(s): We performed a Medline search to identify economic evaluation studies in reproductive medicine. We included studies that concerned interventions, evaluated costs and effects, and were published in a journal on reproductive medicine, gynecology, or a major general journal from 1997 through May 2011. Main Outcome Measure(s): Number of quality criteria adhered to. Result(s): Our search revealed 5,519 articles, of which 85 met our inclusion criteria. Seventy-seven (91%) of the economic analyses were on treatment, six (7%) on diagnosis, and two (2%) on screening. The mean number of quality criteria adhered to was 20 out of 30 items, and only one article met all 30 criteria. The mean number of criteria adhered to was higher if at least one of the authors was from a methodologic or health economics department (mean 23 [n = 30] versus mean 20 [n = 55]). The most common limitations of published economic evaluation studies were in methodology or presentation of incremental analyses, sensitivity analyses, and discounting. Conclusion(s): Economic analyses published in the past 15 years in the field of reproductive medicine seldom adhere to all recommended methodologic standards. A large majority of these publications evaluated treatments rather than diagnostic interventions.

LanguageEnglish
JournalFertility and Sterility
Volume99
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Keywords

  • economic evaluation
  • methodologic quality
  • Reproductive medicine
  • review

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Reproductive Medicine
  • Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Cite this

Moolenaar, L. M., Vijgen, S. M. C., Hompes, P., Van Der Veen, F., Mol, B. W. J., & Opmeer, B. C. (2013). Economic evaluation studies in reproductive medicine: A systematic review of methodologic quality. Fertility and Sterility, 99(6). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.12.045
Moolenaar, Lobke M. ; Vijgen, Sylvia M C ; Hompes, Peter ; Van Der Veen, Fulco ; Mol, Ben Willem J ; Opmeer, Brent C. / Economic evaluation studies in reproductive medicine : A systematic review of methodologic quality. In: Fertility and Sterility. 2013 ; Vol. 99, No. 6.
@article{03d435938d2947b89b51814f341a21c6,
title = "Economic evaluation studies in reproductive medicine: A systematic review of methodologic quality",
abstract = "Objective: To evaluate the methodologic quality of economic analyses published in the field of reproductive medicine. Design: Systematic review. Setting: Centers for reproductive care. Patient(s): Infertility patients. Intervention(s): We performed a Medline search to identify economic evaluation studies in reproductive medicine. We included studies that concerned interventions, evaluated costs and effects, and were published in a journal on reproductive medicine, gynecology, or a major general journal from 1997 through May 2011. Main Outcome Measure(s): Number of quality criteria adhered to. Result(s): Our search revealed 5,519 articles, of which 85 met our inclusion criteria. Seventy-seven (91{\%}) of the economic analyses were on treatment, six (7{\%}) on diagnosis, and two (2{\%}) on screening. The mean number of quality criteria adhered to was 20 out of 30 items, and only one article met all 30 criteria. The mean number of criteria adhered to was higher if at least one of the authors was from a methodologic or health economics department (mean 23 [n = 30] versus mean 20 [n = 55]). The most common limitations of published economic evaluation studies were in methodology or presentation of incremental analyses, sensitivity analyses, and discounting. Conclusion(s): Economic analyses published in the past 15 years in the field of reproductive medicine seldom adhere to all recommended methodologic standards. A large majority of these publications evaluated treatments rather than diagnostic interventions.",
keywords = "economic evaluation, methodologic quality, Reproductive medicine, review",
author = "Moolenaar, {Lobke M.} and Vijgen, {Sylvia M C} and Peter Hompes and {Van Der Veen}, Fulco and Mol, {Ben Willem J} and Opmeer, {Brent C.}",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.12.045",
language = "English",
volume = "99",
journal = "Fertility and Sterility",
issn = "0015-0282",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "6",

}

Economic evaluation studies in reproductive medicine : A systematic review of methodologic quality. / Moolenaar, Lobke M.; Vijgen, Sylvia M C; Hompes, Peter; Van Der Veen, Fulco; Mol, Ben Willem J; Opmeer, Brent C.

In: Fertility and Sterility, Vol. 99, No. 6, 2013.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Economic evaluation studies in reproductive medicine

T2 - Fertility and Sterility

AU - Moolenaar, Lobke M.

AU - Vijgen, Sylvia M C

AU - Hompes, Peter

AU - Van Der Veen, Fulco

AU - Mol, Ben Willem J

AU - Opmeer, Brent C.

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Objective: To evaluate the methodologic quality of economic analyses published in the field of reproductive medicine. Design: Systematic review. Setting: Centers for reproductive care. Patient(s): Infertility patients. Intervention(s): We performed a Medline search to identify economic evaluation studies in reproductive medicine. We included studies that concerned interventions, evaluated costs and effects, and were published in a journal on reproductive medicine, gynecology, or a major general journal from 1997 through May 2011. Main Outcome Measure(s): Number of quality criteria adhered to. Result(s): Our search revealed 5,519 articles, of which 85 met our inclusion criteria. Seventy-seven (91%) of the economic analyses were on treatment, six (7%) on diagnosis, and two (2%) on screening. The mean number of quality criteria adhered to was 20 out of 30 items, and only one article met all 30 criteria. The mean number of criteria adhered to was higher if at least one of the authors was from a methodologic or health economics department (mean 23 [n = 30] versus mean 20 [n = 55]). The most common limitations of published economic evaluation studies were in methodology or presentation of incremental analyses, sensitivity analyses, and discounting. Conclusion(s): Economic analyses published in the past 15 years in the field of reproductive medicine seldom adhere to all recommended methodologic standards. A large majority of these publications evaluated treatments rather than diagnostic interventions.

AB - Objective: To evaluate the methodologic quality of economic analyses published in the field of reproductive medicine. Design: Systematic review. Setting: Centers for reproductive care. Patient(s): Infertility patients. Intervention(s): We performed a Medline search to identify economic evaluation studies in reproductive medicine. We included studies that concerned interventions, evaluated costs and effects, and were published in a journal on reproductive medicine, gynecology, or a major general journal from 1997 through May 2011. Main Outcome Measure(s): Number of quality criteria adhered to. Result(s): Our search revealed 5,519 articles, of which 85 met our inclusion criteria. Seventy-seven (91%) of the economic analyses were on treatment, six (7%) on diagnosis, and two (2%) on screening. The mean number of quality criteria adhered to was 20 out of 30 items, and only one article met all 30 criteria. The mean number of criteria adhered to was higher if at least one of the authors was from a methodologic or health economics department (mean 23 [n = 30] versus mean 20 [n = 55]). The most common limitations of published economic evaluation studies were in methodology or presentation of incremental analyses, sensitivity analyses, and discounting. Conclusion(s): Economic analyses published in the past 15 years in the field of reproductive medicine seldom adhere to all recommended methodologic standards. A large majority of these publications evaluated treatments rather than diagnostic interventions.

KW - economic evaluation

KW - methodologic quality

KW - Reproductive medicine

KW - review

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84876961904&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.12.045

DO - 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.12.045

M3 - Article

VL - 99

JO - Fertility and Sterility

JF - Fertility and Sterility

SN - 0015-0282

IS - 6

ER -