Development of a PRISMA Extension for Systematic Reviews of Health Economic Evaluations (PRISMA-EconEval): A Project Protocol
Author(s)
Phuong B. Tran, PhD1, Joseph Kwon, PhD1, Andrew Booth, PhD2, Anastasios Bastounis, PhD2, Ewan M. Tomeny, PhD3, Sophie Staniszewska, DPhil4, Richard Grant, N/A5, Kednapa Thavorn, PhD6, Dalia Dawoud, PhD7, Rafael Pinedo-Villanueva, PhD8, Sally Hopewell, PhD8, Matthew J. Page, PhD9, Stavros Petrou, PhD1;
1University of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Oxford, United Kingdom, 2University of Sheffield, Sheffield Centre for Health and Related Research (SCHARR), Sheffield, United Kingdom, 3Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool, United Kingdom, 4University of Warwick, Warwick Research in Nursing, Warwick Applied Health, Warwick Medical School, Coventry, United Kingdom, 5Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) Representative; PPI Advisor to Universities of: Warwick, Oxford, Liverpool, and Coventry City Council, Coventry, United Kingdom, 6School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 7National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Science Policy and Research Programme, London, United Kingdom, 8University of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, Oxford, United Kingdom, 9Monash University, Methods in Evidence Synthesis Unit, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Melbourne, Australia
1University of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Oxford, United Kingdom, 2University of Sheffield, Sheffield Centre for Health and Related Research (SCHARR), Sheffield, United Kingdom, 3Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool, United Kingdom, 4University of Warwick, Warwick Research in Nursing, Warwick Applied Health, Warwick Medical School, Coventry, United Kingdom, 5Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) Representative; PPI Advisor to Universities of: Warwick, Oxford, Liverpool, and Coventry City Council, Coventry, United Kingdom, 6School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 7National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Science Policy and Research Programme, London, United Kingdom, 8University of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, Oxford, United Kingdom, 9Monash University, Methods in Evidence Synthesis Unit, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Melbourne, Australia
OBJECTIVES: This project aims to develop a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for systematic reviews of health economic evaluations (PRISMA-EconEval).
METHODS: Project stages include: (1) scoping review; (2) Delphi survey; (3) consensus meeting; (4) piloting; and (5) finalisation and dissemination. The project is overseen by the international multidisciplinary PRISMA-EconEval Management Group (PMG), Advisory Group, and Patient and Public Involvement Group. The scoping review searches Medline, Embase, Web of Science (2015-2024), and grey literature for articles on methods, frameworks, and recommendations for reporting systematic reviews of health economic evaluations. Of 342 full-text articles, 23 have initially been selected for data extraction. Candidate reporting items will be identified and evaluated for global relevance using sample papers from the review or nominated by the health economics community. A multi-round online Delphi survey will gather input from experts (n≈200), including health economists, systematic reviewers, guidelines developers, journal editors, decision-makers, funders, and public representatives. Across 2-3 rounds, panellists will rate candidate items on a 1-9 scale to assess their relevance, clarity, and importance for reporting systematic reviews of health economic evaluations. ISPOR attendees may also be invited to participate. An online consensus meeting (participants≈30) will refine the precise wording of items and resolve any disagreements by vote. Health economists independent of the project will apply the draft guidelines to sample papers and identify practical challenges. PMG will meet to: finalise the wording and presentation of the reporting items, ensure consistency with PRISMA2020, and produce an explanation and elaboration document. Dissemination channels include: peer-reviewed health economics journals, conferences, and the EQUATOR network.
RESULTS: N/A
CONCLUSIONS: PRISMA-EconEval aims to improve clarity, consistency, transparency, quality, and overall value of systematic reviews of health economic evaluations. This will benefit researchers, peer reviewers, journal editors, decision-makers, and ultimately patients and the public, through supporting decisions on healthcare resource allocation.
METHODS: Project stages include: (1) scoping review; (2) Delphi survey; (3) consensus meeting; (4) piloting; and (5) finalisation and dissemination. The project is overseen by the international multidisciplinary PRISMA-EconEval Management Group (PMG), Advisory Group, and Patient and Public Involvement Group. The scoping review searches Medline, Embase, Web of Science (2015-2024), and grey literature for articles on methods, frameworks, and recommendations for reporting systematic reviews of health economic evaluations. Of 342 full-text articles, 23 have initially been selected for data extraction. Candidate reporting items will be identified and evaluated for global relevance using sample papers from the review or nominated by the health economics community. A multi-round online Delphi survey will gather input from experts (n≈200), including health economists, systematic reviewers, guidelines developers, journal editors, decision-makers, funders, and public representatives. Across 2-3 rounds, panellists will rate candidate items on a 1-9 scale to assess their relevance, clarity, and importance for reporting systematic reviews of health economic evaluations. ISPOR attendees may also be invited to participate. An online consensus meeting (participants≈30) will refine the precise wording of items and resolve any disagreements by vote. Health economists independent of the project will apply the draft guidelines to sample papers and identify practical challenges. PMG will meet to: finalise the wording and presentation of the reporting items, ensure consistency with PRISMA2020, and produce an explanation and elaboration document. Dissemination channels include: peer-reviewed health economics journals, conferences, and the EQUATOR network.
RESULTS: N/A
CONCLUSIONS: PRISMA-EconEval aims to improve clarity, consistency, transparency, quality, and overall value of systematic reviews of health economic evaluations. This will benefit researchers, peer reviewers, journal editors, decision-makers, and ultimately patients and the public, through supporting decisions on healthcare resource allocation.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-05, ISPOR 2025, Montréal, Quebec, CA
Value in Health, Volume 28, Issue S1
Code
SA43
Topic
Study Approaches
Topic Subcategory
Literature Review & Synthesis, Meta-Analysis & Indirect Comparisons, Surveys & Expert Panels
Disease
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas