OBJECTIVES: Although health economic studies are useful in decision-making for the efficient use of healthcare resources to maximize health benefits, there are hardly few reports about their qualities. We assessed the quality of pharmacoeconomic studies conducted in India to report key areas of focus on the findings from the reviewed studies.

METHODS: A targeted literature review was conducted using well-defined search strategy in PubMed to identify economic studies conducted in India from May 2017- April 2022. Only economic evaluation studies were included. The quality of included studies was assessed using QHES tool, which comprised of 16 evaluation criteria related to objectives, source, funding, perspective, sub-group analysis, scales, and economic modelling related parameters. Based on scores (100-points), studies were rated as good (>75), fair (50-74) and poor (<49) quality.

RESULTS: Search strategy provided 888 studies; 95 of these were economic studies, and 74 were included in analysis. The included studies comprised cost-effectiveness analysis (n=55), burden of illness, budget-impact analysis (n=8 each), cost-benefit analysis (n=5), cost-utility, and cost-consequences analyses (n=1 each). The average quality score of studies was 64.08. 15 studies were rated as ‘good’, 51 ‘fair’, and 8 ‘poor’. It was observed that primary outcome measures, stating negative outcomes, reporting bias, along with implementing statistical and sensitivity analysis significantly affected the quality score.

CONCLUSIONS: Most of the health economic studies conducted in India are of fair quality and there is a need for standardization of guidelines and increase in number of Indian peer-reviewed health economics journals. A collaborative effort from pharma companies, policy makers, education experts, curriculum planners, and medical faculty is needed to promote quality economic studies. This can help to improve the quality of the pharmacoeconomic research in India.