Checklist for reporting an economic evaluation of health interventions

Provide an explicit statement of the broader context for the study. Present the study question and its relevance for health policy or practice decisions.

Describe characteristics of the base case population and subgroups analysed, including why they were chosen.

State relevant aspects of the system(s) in which the decision(s) need(s) to be made.

Describe the perspective of the study and relate this to the costs being evaluated.

Describe the interventions or strategies being compared and state why they were chosen.

State the time horizon(s) over which costs and consequences are being evaluated and say why appropriate.

Report the choice of discount rate(s) used for costs and outcomes and say why appropriate.

Describe what outcomes were used as the measure(s) of benefit in the evaluation and their relevance for the type of analysis performed.

Single study-based estimates: Describe fully the design features of the single effectiveness study and why the single study was a sufficient source of clinical effectiveness data.

Synthesis-based estimates: Describe fully the methods used for identification of included studies and synthesis of clinical effectiveness data.

If applicable, describe the population and methods used to elicit preferences for outcomes.

Model-based economic evaluation: Describe approaches and data sources used to estimate resource use associated with model health states. Describe primary or secondary research methods for valuing each resource item in terms of its unit cost. Describe any adjustments made to approximate to opportunity costs.

Report the dates of the estimated resource quantities and unit costs. Describe methods for adjusting estimated unit costs to the year of reported costs if necessary. Describe methods for converting costs into a common currency base and the exchange rate.

Describe and give reasons for the specific type of decision analytical model used. Providing a figure to show model structure is strongly recommended.

Describe all structural or other assumptions underpinning the decision-analytical model.

Describe all analytical methods supporting the evaluation. This could include methods for dealing with skewed, missing, or censored data; extrapolation methods; methods for pooling data; approaches to validate or make adjustments (such as half cycle corrections) to a model; and methods for handling population heterogeneity and uncertainty.

Report the values, ranges, references, and, if used, probability distributions for all parameters. Report reasons or sources for distributions used to represent uncertainty where appropriate. Providing a table to show the input values is strongly recommended.

For each intervention, report mean values for the main categories of estimated costs and outcomes of interest, as well as mean differences between the comparator groups. If applicable, report incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.

Single study-based economic evaluation: Describe the effects of sampling uncertainty for the estimated incremental cost and incremental effectiveness parameters, together with the impact of methodological assumptions (such as discount rate, study perspective).

Model-based economic evaluation: Describe the effects on the results of uncertainty for all input parameters, and uncertainty related to the structure of the model and assumptions.

If applicable, report differences in costs, outcomes, or cost effectiveness that can be explained by variations between subgroups of patients with different baseline characteristics or other observed variability in effects that are not reducible by more information.

Summarise key study findings and describe how they support the conclusions reached. Discuss limitations and the generalisability of the findings and how the findings fit with current knowledge.

Describe how the study was funded and the role of the funder in the identification, design, conduct, and reporting of the analysis. Describe other non-monetary sources of support.

Describe any potential for conflict of interest of study contributors in accordance with journal policy. In the absence of a journal policy, we recommend authors comply with International Committee of Medical Journal Editors recommendations.