Table 10 Assessment results based on the Quality of Health Economic Studies Instrument (QHES) Checklist
From: Impact assessment of Iran’s health technology assessment programme
No. | QHES questions | Weightings | The number of reports that had taken this step |
|---|---|---|---|
1 | Was the study objective presented in a clear, specific and measurable manner? | 7 | 12 (92.3%) |
2 | Were the perspective of the analysis (societal, third-party payer, etc.) and reasons for its selection stated? | 4 | 4 (30.8%) |
3 | Were variable estimates used in the analysis from the best available source (i.e. randomised control trial – best; expert opinion – worst)? | 8 | 11 (84.6%) |
4 | If estimates came from a subgroup analysis, were the groups pre-specified at the beginning of the study? | 1 | 4 (30.8%) |
5 | Was uncertainty handled by (1) statistical analysis to address random events, (2) sensitivity analysis to cover a range of assumptions? | 9 | 10 (76.92%) |
6 | Was incremental analysis performed between alternatives for resources and costs? | 6 | 11 (84.6%) |
7 | Was the methodology for data abstraction (including the value of health states and other benefits) stated? | 5 | 7 (53.8%) |
8 | Did the analytic horizon allow time for all relevant and important outcomes? Were benefits and costs that went beyond 1 year discounted (3–5%) and justification given for the discount rate? | 7 | 4 (30.8%) |
9 | Was the measurement of costs appropriate and the methodology for the estimation of quantities and unit costs clearly described? | 8 | 11 (84.6%) |
10 | Was the primary outcome measure(s) for the economic evaluation clearly stated and was the major short-term justification given for the measures/scales used? | 6 | 8 (61.5%) |
11 | Were the health outcomes measures/scales valid and reliable? If previously tested valid and reliable measures were not available, was justification given for the measures/scales used? | 7 | 7 (53.8%) |
12 | Were the economic model (including structure), study methods and analysis, and the components of the numerator and denominator displayed in a clear, transparent manner? | 8 | 13 (100.0%) |
13 | Were the choice of economic model, main assumptions, and limitations of the study stated and justified? | 7 | 9 (69.2%) |
14 | Did the author(s) explicitly discuss direction and magnitude of potential biases? | 6 | 5 (38.5%) |
15 | Were the conclusions/recommendations of the study justified and based on the study results? | 8 | 13 (100.0%) |
16 | Was there a statement disclosing the source of funding for the study? | 3 | 0 |