Journal article icon

Journal article

Evidence synthesis to inform model-based cost-effectiveness evaluations of diagnostic tests: A methodological review of Health Technology Assessments

Abstract:
Background
Evaluations of diagnostic tests are challenging because of the indirect nature of their impact on patient outcomes. Model-based health economic evaluations of tests allow different types of evidence from various sources to be incorporated and enable cost-effectiveness estimates to be made beyond the duration of available study data. To parameterize a health-economic model fully, all the ways a test impacts on patient health must be quantified, including but not limited to diagnostic test accuracy.

Methods
We assessed all UK NIHR HTA reports published May 2009-July 2015. Reports were included if they evaluated a diagnostic test, included a model-based health economic evaluation and included a systematic review and meta-analysis of test accuracy. From each eligible report we extracted information on the following topics: 1) what evidence aside from test accuracy was searched for and synthesised, 2) which methods were used to synthesise test accuracy evidence and how did the results inform the economic model, 3) how/whether threshold effects were explored, 4) how the potential dependency between multiple tests in a pathway was accounted for, and 5) for evaluations of tests targeted at the primary care setting, how evidence from differing healthcare settings was incorporated.

Results
The bivariate or HSROC model was implemented in 20/22 reports that met all inclusion criteria. Test accuracy data for health economic modelling was obtained from meta-analyses completely in four reports, partially in fourteen reports and not at all in four reports. Only 2/7 reports that used a quantitative test gave clear threshold recommendations. All 22 reports explored the effect of uncertainty in accuracy parameters but most of those that used multiple tests did not allow for dependence between test results. 7/22 tests were potentially suitable for primary care but the majority found limited evidence on test accuracy in primary care settings.

Conclusions
The uptake of appropriate meta-analysis methods for synthesising evidence on diagnostic test accuracy in UK NIHR HTAs has improved in recent years. Future research should focus on other evidence requirements for cost-effectiveness assessment, threshold effects for quantitative tests and the impact of multiple diagnostic tests.
Publication status:
Published
Peer review status:
Peer reviewed

Actions

Access Document

Files:
Publisher copy:
10.1186/s12874-017-0331-7

Authors

More by this author
Institution:
University of Oxford
Division:
MSD
Department:
Primary Care Health Sciences
Role:
Author
More by this author
Institution:
University of Oxford
Division:
MSD
Department:
Primary Care Health Sciences
Role:
Author
More by this author
Institution:
University of Oxford
Division:
MSD
Department:
Primary Care Health Sciences
Role:
Author


Publisher:
BioMed Central
Journal:
BMC Medical Research Methodology More from this journal
Volume:
17
Issue:
56
Publication date:
2017-04-14
Acceptance date:
2017-03-02
DOI:
EISSN:
1471-2288


Keywords:
Pubs id:
pubs:687165
UUID:
uuid:42ed2d09-f1a8-4b44-ad0b-4cdeb8c9657b
Local pid:
pubs:687165
Source identifiers:
687165
Deposit date:
2017-03-27
ARK identifier:

Terms of use


Views and Downloads






If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record

TO TOP