The DOI matches its Crossref record; 74 of the 76 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Examining the Value and Quality of Health Economic Analyses: Implications of Utilizing the QHES
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the increasing use of health economic studies and practical implications of evaluating their quality utilizing the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument. METHODS: We first reviewed secondary references to examine ways in which health economic analyses are used in different health care settings, the manner in which these data are appraised and evaluated, and their relevance and value in decision making. The QHES, a new instrument designed to support fast, accurate initial assessments of study quality, was then introduced and validated. A case study was performed using the QHES to score the quality of 30 cost-effectiveness studies in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) published since 1985. Areas where additional research could guide efforts to identify and enhance the use of higher-quality cost-effectiveness studies were suggested. RESULTS: Results from the published validation study of the QHES demonstrated the validity of this new instrument. The resulting QHES scores in the case study of GERD papers ranged from 43 to 91 with a mean of 63.6 (SD=14.7). Approximately 27% of the studies rated had scores less than 50, and 27% had scores above or equal to 75. All 30 studies made conclusions and recommendations and justified them based on their study results. Most studies used appropriate cost and health outcome measures. Very few studies stated the perspective of their analysis and reasons for its selection. The majority of the studies did not perform incremental analysis. CONCLUSION: An examination of the QHES validation study and the case study in GERD suggests that there is a rationale and potential utility to use a quality scoring system for cost-effectiveness studies. The QHES may play an important role in discriminating higher-quality cost-effectiveness information to enhance decision making. The QHES can also serve as a guideline for conducting and reporting future cost-effectiveness studies, as an aid in the editorial process, and for stratification in systematic reviews. Complex decisions regarding resource allocation rarely rely solely on economic considerations but do increasingly use health economic analyses. To the extent that such analyses are used, the QHES may help ensure that higher-quality analyses receive more analytic attention and greater weight in the decision-making process.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“As per standard practice using this framework, the studies were deemed to be of good quality if they attained a score of 75/100 or higher [5].”
From Use of health economic evaluation in the implementation and improvement science fields—a systematic literature review (2019) · cites this paper as [5]
In the citing paper
“The QHES instrument was designed to more easily tell the difference between high-quality and low-quality studies [5].”
From Use of health economic evaluation in the implementation and improvement science fields—a systematic literature review (2019) · cites this paper as [5]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?
Jadad, A. R., Moore, R. A., Carroll, D., Jenkinson, C., Reynolds, D. J. M., Gavaghan, D. J., & McQuay, H. J. (1996) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4 · Cited by 17,582
Moher, D., Pham, B., Jones, A., Cook, D. J., Jadad, A. R., Moher, M., Tugwell, P., & Klassen, T. P. (1998) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(98)01085-x · Cited by 3,560
Users' Guides to the Medical Literature
Guyatt, G. H. (1993) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.270.17.2096 · Cited by 3,083
Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine
Weinstein, M. C. (1996) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1996.03540150055031 · Cited by 2,455 · cited 1×
“Weinstein et al., 1996.”
The Hazards of Scoring the Quality of Clinical Trials for Meta-analysis
Jüni, P. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.11.1054 · Cited by 1,981
Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ
Drummond, M. F., & Jefferson, T. O. (1996) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.313.7052.275 · Cited by 1,827
Moher, D., Jadad, A. R., Nichol, G., Penman, M., Tugwell, P., & Walsh, S. (1995) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(94)00031-w · Cited by 1,308
The Role of Cost-effectiveness Analysis in Health and Medicine
Russell, L. B. (1996) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1996.03540140060028 · Cited by 1,167
Are Guidelines Following Guidelines?
Shaneyfelt, T. M., Mayo‐Smith, M. F., & Rothwangl, J. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.281.20.1900 · Cited by 853
Robinson, R. (1993) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.307.6907.793 · Cited by 819
Flagged first, then by citations
2 of the 76 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 19
- Shaneyfelt TM, Mayo-Smith MF, Rothwangl J. Are guidelines following guide- lines? The methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines in the peer- reviewed medical literature. JAMA. 1999;281:1900-05.
- Drummond MF, Richardson WS, O'Brien BJ, et al. User' s guide to the medical literature. XIII. How to use an article on economic analysis of clinical practice. A. Are the results of the study valid? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 1997; 277:1552-57.
- O'Brien B, Heyland D, Richardson WS, et al. User' s guide to the medical litera- ture. XIII. How to use an article on economic analysis of clinical practice. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? JAMA.1997; 277:1802-06.
- Sonnenberg A, Inadomi JM, Becker LA. Economic analysis of step-wise treat- ment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 1999;13:1003-13.
- Stalhammar NO. Assessing the cost-effectiveness of medical treatments in Examining the Value and Quality of Health Economic Analyses: Implications of Utilizing the QHES acid-related diseases. The Markov chain approach applied to a comparison between intermittent and maintenance treatment of reflux esophagitis. Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl. 1993;199:8-13.
- Bate C, Richardson P. Cost-effectiveness of omeprazole in the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease in clinical practice. Br J Med Econ. 1994;7:81-97.
- Bate C, Hungin A, Wilcock C. Cost-effective management of gastroesophageal reflux disease in general practice. Br J Med Econ. 1993;6:81-90.
- Bate C, Green J, Taylor M. Cost-effective prophylaxis against the recurrence of benign oesophageal stricture. Br J Med Econ. 1995;8:97-107.
- Bate C, Richardson P. A one-year model for the cost-effectiveness of treating reflux oesophagitis. Br J Med Econ. 1992;2:5-11.
- Bate C. Cost-effectiveness of omeprazole in the treatment of reflux oesophagi- tis. Br J Med Econ. 1991;1:53-61.
- Bate C, Richardson P. Symptomatic assessment and cost effectiveness of treat- ments for reflux oesophagitis: comparisons of omeprazole and histamine H2- receptor antagonists. Br J Med Econ. 1992;2:37-48.
- Green J, Bate C, Copeman M. A comparison of the cost-effectiveness of omeprazole and ranitidine in reflux oesophagitis. Br J Med Econ. 1995;8:37-48.
- Jonsson B, Stalhammar NO. The cost-effectiveness of omeprazole and raniti- dine in intermittent and maintenance treatment of reflux oesophagitis-the case of Sweden. Br J Med Econ. 1993;6:111-26.
- Phillips C, Moore A. Trial and error-an expensive luxury: economic analysis of effectiveness of proton pump inhibitors and histamine antagonists in treating reflux disease. Br J Med Econ. 1997;11:55-63.
- Bate C, Richardson P. Cost-effectiveness of 20 mg and 40 mg of omeprazole in oesophageal reflux disease. Br J Med Econ. 1993;6:59-66.
- Torrance GW, Blaker D, Detsky A, et al. Canadian guidelines for economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals. Canadian Collaborative Workshop for Pharmacoeconomics. Pharmacoeconomics. 1996;9:535-59.
- Economic analysis of health care technology. A report on principles. Task Force on Principles for Economic Analysis of Health Care Technology. Ann Intern Med. 1995;123:61-70.
- Drummond M, O'Brien B, Stoddart G, Torrance GW. Critical Assessment of Economic Evaluation. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford, England: Oxford Medical Publications; 1997:27-51.
- Drummond MF, Jefferson TO. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. BMJ. 1996;313:275-83.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 301–366 of 366
12. Noncommunicable Disease Prevention
Callahan, D., & EPSTEIN, R. A. (2019) · University of California Press eBooks · doi:10.1525/9780520967731-014 · Cited by 1
Chiang, X.-H., Hsu, H., Chen, J., Hsu, C., & Hsu, H. (2022) · Formosan Journal of Surgery · doi:10.4103/fjs.fjs_114_22 · Cited by 1
Reporting and interpreting results of economic evaluation
Edoka, I., Krubiner, C., Mirelman, A. J., McQueen, R. B., Sculpher, M. J., Slejko, J. F., & Wilkinson, T. (2023) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192896087.003.0018 · Cited by 1
Weı, C., Li, R., Wu, Z., Xiao, G., & Hu, M. (2024) · Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research · doi:10.5530/ijper.58.3.80 · Cited by 1
Boluda-Verdú, I., & Catalá-López, F. (2025) · Gaceta Sanitaria · doi:10.1016/j.gaceta.2025.102457 · Cited by 3
Rezapour, A., Sheikhrobat, M. V., Souresrafil, A., Moeini, S., Roghani, T., Sayyad, A., & Ghorrabi, A. T. (2025) · Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research · doi:10.1080/14737167.2025.2480718 · Cited by 1
Teerawattananon, Y., Sharma, M., Luz, A., Rattanavipapong, W., & Elshaug, A. G. (2019) · Open Book Publishers · doi:10.11647/obp.0195.05 · Cited by 1
9. Deliberative Processes in Decisions about Best Buys, Wasted Buys, and Contestable Buys
Chalkidou, K., & Culyer, A. J. (2019) · Open Book Publishers · doi:10.11647/obp.0195.09 · Cited by 1
Zawadzki, N. K., & Hay, J. W. (2019) · International Journal of Health Policy and Management · doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2019.132 · Cited by 1
Self-citationZhang, J., Bai, Q., & Bian, Y. (2021) · Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine · doi:10.1155/2021/5537435 · Cited by 1
Abushanab, D., Al‐Badriyeh, D., Marquina, C., Bailey, C., Jaam, M. J., Liew, D., & Ademi, Z. (2021) · Journal of emergency medicine, trauma & acute care · doi:10.5339/jemtac.2022.qhc.38 · Cited by 1
Freijer, K. (2014) · doi:10.26481/dis.20140924kf · Cited by 1
Summary Quality Scores for Pharmacoeconomic Studies: Balancing Validity With Need
Shaya, F. T., & Lyles, C. A. (2003) · Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy · doi:10.18553/jmcp.2003.9.1.87 · Cited by 1
Eamer, G. (2017) · ERA: Education and Research Archive (University of Alberta) · doi:10.7939/r3k931m2t · Cited by 1
Rimon, W. (2005) · eCite Digital Repository (University of Tasmania) · Cited by 1
Kwon, J., Squires, H., Franklin, M. K., Lee, Y., & Young, T. A. (2021) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-481557/v2 · Cited by 1
Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in lumbar spine surgery
Droeghaag, R. (2024) · doi:10.26481/dis.20240527rd · Cited by 1
Measurement Issues in the Use of Epidemiologic Data
Oleske, D. M. (2009) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-0164-4_2
ARE WE SATISFIED WITH THE QUALITY OF COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSES IN GASTROENTEROLOGY?
Gerson, L. B. (2005) · Evidence-Based Gastroenterology · doi:10.1097/01.ebg.0000154103.84903.06
Revisão sistemática dos estudos de avaliação econômica em saúde desenvolvidos no Brasil de 1980-2013
Decimoni, T. C. (2016) · Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (Universidade de São Paulo) · doi:10.11606/d.5.2016.tde-02052016-143412
Economic Evaluation of Pharmacist-Managed Warfarin Therapy
Saokaew, S., Samprasit, N., Kulchaitanaroaj, P., & Chaiyakunapruk, N. (2017) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-803659-4.00009-6
Arora, D. (2017) · TSpace (University of Toronto)
Economic Evaluation of a Point of Care Pharmacogenetic Test (CYP2C19) from an Ontario Perspective
Bereza, B. G. (2017) · TSpace (University of Toronto)
Accelerating adjuvant breast radiotherapy : the cost of convenience
Monten, C. (2018) · Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University)
Quantifying Efficiency in the Field of Injury, Mental Healthcare and Prevention
Ophuis, R. H. (2019) · EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam)
Research at Work: Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
Jaggers, J. W., & Kondrat, D. C. (2019) · Families in Society The Journal of Contemporary Social Services · doi:10.1177/1044389419862112
3. Framework for Implementing Best Buys and Avoiding Wasted Buys
Teerawattananon, Y., Luz, A., Sharma, M., & Rattanavipapong, W. (2019) · Open Book Publishers · doi:10.11647/obp.0195.03
Bhatia, T., Nakamura, R., & Shichijo, A. (2019) · Open Book Publishers · doi:10.11647/obp.0195.04
Gupta, S. K., Tiwari, R. K., & Goel, R. K. (2021) · Perspectives in Clinical Research · doi:10.4103/picr.picr_137_19
Economic Evaluation in the Genomic Era
Fragoulakis, V., Mitropoulou, C., Williams, M. S., & Patrinos, G. P. (2015) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-801497-4.00006-0
Kwon, J., Lee, Y., Squires, H., Franklin, M. K., & Young, T. A. (2021) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-481557/v1
Amato, A. T., & Émond, G. (2021) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/j5k2y
Donald, F., Kilpatrick, K., Reid, K., Carter, N., Martin‐Misener, R., Bryant‐Lukosius, D., Harbman, P., Kaasalainen, S., Marshall, D. A., Charbonneau-Smith, R., et al. (2021) · doi:10.32920/14637009
Isaranuwatchai, W., Archer, R. A., & Culyer, A. J. (2019) · Open Book Publishers · doi:10.11647/obp.0195.10
Evaluating the Quality of the Economic Evidence in Colorectal Cancer Genomics Studies
Chaudhari, V., Hole, K. C., & Issa, A. M. (2022) · Personalized Medicine · doi:10.2217/pme-2021-0006
Martín-García, P., Alonso‐Arroyo, A., & Catalá-López, F. (2023) · Medicina Clínica (English Edition) · doi:10.1016/j.medcle.2023.02.001
Mason, S. M., Wakai, A., & Pak, A. (2023) · Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1007/s43678-023-00562-7
Wang, M., Jiang, S., Lu, J., Tan, K., Gu, Y., & Li, S. (2023) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2023.12.09.23299771
Öksüz, E., & Malhan, S. (2022) · Akademisyen Kitabevi eBooks · doi:10.37609/akya.1201
Yousefi, N., Noqani, H., Mohammadnezhad, G., Foroughi, M. J., & Peiravian, F. (2024) · Journal of Pharmaceutical Care · doi:10.18502/jpc.v12i1.16025
Wang, S., Tan, L., & Sheng, B. (2024) · Frontiers in Surgery · doi:10.3389/fsurg.2024.1437290
Pharmacy practice expansion: The continued need for high‐quality economic evaluations
Schumock, G. T. (2025) · JACCP JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CLINICAL PHARMACY · doi:10.1002/jac5.70042
de Oliveira, C., Mason, J., Amani, B., Liddell, G., Szatmári, P., Henderson, J. L., & Courtney, D. (2025) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-092541
Ying, T., Yang, Y., Luo, B., Lian, D., Weng, J., Li, F., Yan, J., & Chen, Y. (2025) · Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine · doi:10.1111/jebm.70040
Wu, W., Zhu, Y., Lin, H., Liu, J., Liu, S., Zhang, L., Cai, J., Sun, H., & Wei, X. (2025) · The Breast · doi:10.1016/j.breast.2025.104551
Uzoaru, F., Nwaozuru, U., Ong, J. J., Obi, F. A., Obiezu‐Umeh, C., Tucker, J. D., Shato, T., Mason, S., Carter, V., Manu, S., et al. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14913564
Uzoaru, F., Nwaozuru, U., Ong, J. J., Obi, F. A., Obiezu‐Umeh, C., Tucker, J. D., Shato, T., Mason, S., Carter, V., Manu, S., et al. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14913561
Additional file 1 of Economic impact of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: a systematic review
Rodríguez, F. G., Gamboa-Alonso, A., Jiménez-Hernández, S., Ochoa-Alderete, L., Barrientos-Martínez, V. A., Álvarez‐Villalobos, N. A., Luna-Ruíz, G. A., Peláez-Ballestas, I. D. P., Villarreal-Treviño, A. V., de la O-Cavazos, M. E., et al. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.16779414
Uzoaru, F., Nwaozuru, U., Ong, J. J., Obi, F. A., Obiezu‐Umeh, C., Tucker, J. D., Shato, T., Mason, S., Carter, V., Manu, S., et al. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14913558
Additional file 2 of Economic impact of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: a systematic review
Rodríguez, F. G., Gamboa-Alonso, A., Jiménez-Hernández, S., Ochoa-Alderete, L., Barrientos-Martínez, V. A., Álvarez‐Villalobos, N. A., Luna-Ruíz, G. A., Peláez-Ballestas, I. D. P., Villarreal-Treviño, A. V., de la O-Cavazos, M. E., et al. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.16779417
Jaberi, N., Alimoradnori, M., Souresrafil, A., Rezapour, A., & Tatarpoor, P. (2025) · Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research · doi:10.1080/14737167.2025.2604575
Riccio, M., Rosso, A., Siena, L. M., Baccolini, V., Migliara, G., Sciurti, A., Isonne, C., Iera, J., Pierri, F., Marzuillo, C., et al. (2026) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2025.1728978
Sanyal, C., Watema-Lord, R., & Xie, F. (2026) · JACCP JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CLINICAL PHARMACY · doi:10.1002/jac5.70166
Nam, K.-A., Ha, M.-K., Kang, D.-W., & Park, S.-K. (2026) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-026-27078-w
Mpinganzima, R., Lee, T., Nguyen, H., Bonsu, K. O., & Young, S. W. (2026) · Thrombosis Update · doi:10.1016/j.tru.2026.100237
Cost-effectiveness of sofosbuvir- ledipasvir for Hepatitis C treatment: a systematic review
Jaberi, N., Afshari, S., Khalili, F., & Rezapour, A. (2026) · European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00228-026-04017-7
Yuan, X., Shi, J., Wang, Q., & Hu, M. (2026) · Archives of Public Health · doi:10.1186/s13690-026-01908-0
Kim, H.-J., Nam, K.-A., Jang, S., Ban, K. A., Lee, E., & Park, S. (2026) · Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation · doi:10.1186/s12962-026-00787-0
Fontanals‐Jimenez, A., Trapero‐Bertran, M., & Calderón, E. I. (2026) · Nursing Inquiry · doi:10.1111/nin.70146
Jang, K., Morton, R. L., Dennis, M., Nikolovski, J., Zhan, X., 柯玉玲, Burns, B., & Tran, A. D. (2026) · Prehospital Emergency Care · doi:10.1080/10903127.2026.2741269
Wilmé, V., Chenou, A., Sauleau, E.-A., & Kepka, S. (2026) · European Journal of Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1097/mej.0000000000001389
Hembrecht, S., Dowling, G. P., Chiodo, S., Hegarty, A., Daly, G. R., Boland, F., Hill, A. D. K., & Hopkins, A. M. (2026) · The European Journal of Health Economics · doi:10.1007/s10198-026-02007-1
Metadata
- Authors
- Ofman, J. J., Sullivan, S. D., Neumann, P. J., Chiou, C.-F., Henning, J. M., Wade, S. W., & Hay, J. W.
- Venue
- Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy
- Publisher
- Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy
- Published
- 2003-01
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 53-61
- ISSN
- 1083-4087 (ISSN-L)
- 1944-706X
- PMC
- PMC10437166
- OpenAlex
- W2130921523
- Cited by
- 366
- References
- 76
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 9.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
- Keywords
- instrument validation, gastroesophageal reflux disease, healthcare decision-making, resource allocation, reporting guidelines, systematic reviews
- MeSH terms
- Cost-Benefit Analysis, Delivery of Health Care, Humans, United States, Economics, Pharmaceutical
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
