Improving the quality of abstract reporting for economic analyses in oncology.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (34_suppl) ◽  
pp. 109-109
Author(s):  
Maria Yi Ho ◽  
Kelvin Chan ◽  
Stuart Peacock ◽  
Winson Y. Cheung
Keyword(s):  
Health Economic ◽  
Time Horizon ◽  
Quality Score ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Expert Rating ◽  
Economic Analyses ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Abstract Reporting ◽  
Over Time

109 Background: Increasing costs of cancer drugs underscore the importance of EA, which convey key information about the relative costs and benefits of new interventions. Although guidelines for abstracts exist for phase I, II, and III oncology trials, similar recommendations for EA are lacking. Our objectives were to 1) identify items considered to be essential for EA abstracts; 2) evaluate the quality of EA abstracts submitted to ASCO, ASH, and ISPOR meetings; and 3) propose guidelines for future reporting. Methods: Health economic experts were surveyed and asked to rate each of 24 possible EA elements on a 5-point Likert scale. A scoring system for abstract quality (0=poor and 100=excellent) was devised based on EA elements with an average expert rating ≥ 3.5. All EA abstracts from ASCO (‘97–‘09), ASH (‘04–‘09) and ISPOR (‘97–‘09) were reviewed and assigned a quality score. Results: Of 99 experts surveyed, 50 (51%) responded. Characteristics of respondents: average age = 53; male = 78%; US / Europe / Canada = 54% / 28% / 18%. A total of 216 abstracts were reviewed: ASCO 53%, ASH 14% and ISPOR 33%. Median quality score was 75 (range 48 to 93), but notable deficiencies were observed. For instance, the cost perspective of the EA was reported in only 61% of abstracts, while the time horizon was described in only 47%. An association was seen between year of presentation and overall quality of abstracts (p=0.001), with those from recent years demonstrating better quality scores. There were also disparities in quality scores among EA of different cancer sites (p=0.005). Conclusions: Quality of EA abstracts for oncology has improved over time, but there is room for improvement. Abstracts may be enhanced using guidelines derived from our survey of experts (see table). [Table: see text]

The quality of phase I trial (P1T) abstracts submitted to ASCO meetings

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6532-6532
Author(s):  
E. L. Strevel ◽  
N. Chau ◽  
G. R. Pond ◽  
A. J. Murgo ◽  
S. P. Ivy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Drug Development ◽  
Maximum Tolerated Dose ◽  
Quality Score ◽  
Electronic Survey ◽  
Governmental Agencies ◽  
Expert Rating ◽  
Expert Ratings ◽  
Oral Presentations ◽  
Abstract Reporting

6532 Background: Conference abstracts of P1T communicate important information of anticancer drug development. Our objectives were to determine elements considered by experts as essential for good P1T abstract reporting, to assess the quality of P1T abstracts submitted to ASCO meetings, and to propose guidelines for future reporting. Methods: Elements important for P1T abstract reporting were determined by a survey of experts in developmental therapeutics, and a scoring system for abstract quality was generated. All P1T abstracts published in ASCO Proceedings from 2002–2006 were reviewed, and a quality score was assigned. Results: An electronic survey was sent twice to 69 experts, with a response rate of 39% (27/69). Characteristics of the 27 experts were: average age = 48; male = 74%, USA:Europe:Canada = 78%:15%:7%; 89% had 10+ years experience in drug development; 93% from academic institutions versus 7% from governmental agencies; 56% currently involved in clinical research versus 44% in translational research. Experts were asked to rate each of 37 elements using a five-point Like rt scale, and elements with average expert ratings over 3.75 were included in the final quality score calculations. A total of 920 P1T abstracts over 5 years were reviewed. A positive and linear association was observed between average expert rating of the elements and proportion of P1T abstracts that included those elements (Spearman correlation coefficient, ρ=0.65). The median quality score for all 920 abstracts was 65% (range 26%–95%, SD 12.6%). Deficiencies existed in abstract reporting; for instance, dose-limiting toxicity was described in only 63% of abstracts, while recommended dose or maximum tolerated dose was reported in only 38%. A significant association between year of presentation was found (ρ=0.36, P<0.001), with later years possessing better quality scores. The quality score was also statistically significant as a predictor of type of presentation (odds ratio 0.20, 95% CI 0.08–0.54, P=0.002), with oral presentations having the highest scores. Conclusion: The quality of P1T abstract reporting at ASCO has improved over time, although there is room for optimization. The quality of P1T abstract reporting may be enhanced using guidelines derived from our expert consensus. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Value-based dentistry: Putting the patient first

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 126-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sreenivas Koka ◽  
Galya Raz
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Dental Care ◽  
Time Cost ◽  
Safety Risk ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Over Time

What does ‘value’ mean? In the context of dental care, it can be defined as the quality of care received by a patient divided by the cost to the patient of receiving that care. In other words: V =Q/C, where Q equals the quality improvement over time, which most patients view in the context of the outcome, the service provided and safety/risk management, and C equals the financial, biological and time cost to the patient. Here, the need for, and implications of, value-based density for clinicians and patients alike are explored.

Examining the Value and Quality of Health Economic Analyses: Implications of Utilizing the QHES

2003 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua J. Ofman ◽  
Sean D. Sullivan ◽  
Peter J. Neumann ◽  
Chiun-Fang Chiou ◽  
James M. Henning ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Economic ◽  
Economic Analyses

scholarly journals Mutu Pelayanan Radiologi Di Balai Besar Kesehatan Paru Masyarakat (BBKPM) Makassar

Lontara ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 57-68
Author(s):  
Nurbeti Salam ◽  
Bambang Ariyanto ◽  
Maharani Gayatri
Keyword(s):  
Quality Score ◽  
Environmental Aspects ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Descriptive Research ◽  
Health Support ◽  
Quality Value ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Lung Health ◽  
High Quality Score

Services in the field of radiology which are health support services also need to maintain and improve the quality of their services. Radiology is one of the supporting units of health services in establishing the diagnosis of a disease and also needs to maintain and improve the quality of services appropriately and safely, both for patients (users), radiographers (officers) and the community or the surrounding environment. This study aims to determine the quality of radiology services at the Center for Community Lung Health (BBKPM) Makassar. The method used is descriptive research with a quantitative approach. The population is all patients in the radiology installation of the Center for Community Lung Health (BBKPM) with a sample of 158 people. The results showed that the quality of radiology services in terms of timeliness was categorized as very high, namely 91.86%. The cost of Thorax photo examination services is relatively cheap and affordable and the service waiting time reaches a fairly high-quality value of 86.79%. The information aspect reached a high-quality value, namely 85.97%. The technical executor of the Thorax photo examination is carried out by a radiographer and the executor of the diagnostic results is a radiologist (radiology specialist) who has achieved a fairly high-quality score of 97.15%. Aspects of Human Relations have reached a fairly high-quality score of 87.00%. Environmental Aspects achieved a quality value of 97.57%. It is recommended that the Makassar BBKPM management provide a complaint box (suggestion box) in the radiology room to evaluate services.

scholarly journals Can polygenic risk scores contribute to cost-effective cancer screening? A systematic review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Padraig Dixon ◽  
Edna Keeney ◽  
Jenny C Taylor ◽  
Sarah Wordsworth ◽  
Richard Martin
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Economic ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Polygenic Risk ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Economic Studies

Polygenic risk is known to influence susceptibility to cancer. The use of data on polygenic risk, in conjunction with other predictors of future disease status, may offer significant potential for preventative care through risk-stratified screening programmes. An important element in the evaluation of screening programmes is their cost-effectiveness. We undertook a systematic review of papers evaluating the cost-effectiveness of screening interventions informed by polygenic risk scores compared to more conventional screening modalities. We included papers reporting cost-effectiveness outcomes in the English language published as articles or uploaded onto preprint servers with no restriction on date, type of cancer or form of polygenic risk modelled. We excluded papers evaluating screening interventions that did not report cost-effectiveness outcomes or which had a focus on monogenic risk. We evaluated studies using the Quality of Health Economic Studies checklist. Ten studies were included in the review, which investigated three cancers: prostate (n=5), colorectal (n=3) and breast (n=2). All study designs were cost-utility papers implemented as Markov models (n=6) or microsimulations (n=4). Nine of ten papers scored highly (score >75 on a 0-100) scale) when assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies checklist. Eight of ten studies concluded that polygenic risk informed cancer screening was likely to be more cost-effective than alternatives. However, the included studies lacked robust external data on the cost of polygenic risk stratification, did not account for how very large volumes of polygenic risk data on individuals would be collected and used, did not consider ancestry-related differences in polygenic risk, and did not fully account for downstream economic sequalae stemming from the use of polygenic risk data in these ways. These topics merit attention in future research on how polygenic risk data might contribute to cost-effective cancer screening.

scholarly journals How not to count the health benefits of family planning

2021 ◽  
pp. medethics-2021-107668
Author(s):  
Jacob Zionts ◽  
Joseph Millum
Keyword(s):  
Health Economic ◽  
Family Planning ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Study Group ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Value Judgments ◽  
Value Judgment ◽  
Scarce Resources ◽  
Child Deaths ◽  
Economic Analyses

Several influential organisations have attempted to quantify the costs and benefits of expanding access to interventions—like contraceptives—that are expected to decrease the number of pregnancies. Such health economic evaluations can be invaluable to those making decisions about how to allocate scarce resources for health. Yet how the benefits should be measured depends on controversial value judgments. One such value judgment is found in recent analyses from the Disease Control Priority Network (DCPN) and the Study Group for the Global Investment Framework for Women’s and Children’s Health. Noting the decrease in the number of pregnancies expected to result from providing access to family planning, DCPN and the Study Group claim that a substantial benefit of such interventions is averting the stillbirths and child deaths that would have resulted from those pregnancies. We argue that health economic analyses should not count such averted deaths as benefits in the same way as saved lives. First, by counting averted stillbirths and child deaths as a benefit but not counting as a cost the lives of babies who survive, DCPN and the Study Group implicitly commit themselves to antinatalism. Second, this method for calculating the benefits of family planning interventions implies that infertility treatments are harmful. Determining how potential people should be treated in health economic analyses will require grappling with population ethics.

scholarly journals Improving the quality of abstract reporting for economic analyses in oncology

2012 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
M.Y. Ho ◽  
K.K. Chan ◽  
S. Peacock ◽  
W.Y. Cheung
Keyword(s):  
Economic Analyses ◽  
Abstract Reporting

scholarly journals The Impact of Psoriasis on the Quality of Life of Patients in San Antonio, TX

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 331-334
Author(s):  
Anisha Guda ◽  
Catherine Kowalewski ◽  
Sandra Osswald ◽  
Richard Usatine
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Support Group ◽  
San Antonio ◽  
Care And Support ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Barrier To Care ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Question Survey ◽  
Over Time

Background: Psoriasis impacts 2% of the world’s population. The disease affects the quality of life of patients by causing pain and depression. Little information is available regarding the impact of psoriasis on San Antonio patients.Objective: This project obtained information from patients about how they are coping with psoriasis, impact on their quality of life, barriers to care, and support systems they have.Methods: An IRB approved six question survey was administered to 50 patients who attended the VA, a psoriasis support group, and Haven for Hope homeless clinic.Results: 40% of patients who completed the survey had been living with psoriasis for less than 5 years. 75% of patients in this group claimed they were severely depressed. The disease impacted them most psychologically and their greatest barrier to care was access to medications that “cured” their psoriasis. 60% of the patients were living with psoriasis for more than 5 years, and 81% claimed they were not depressed at all. Psoriasis impacted them most financially and their greatest barrier was the cost of care.Conclusion: Acutely, psoriasis patients are impacted psychologically and are frustrated with their disease. Over time, they learn to live with their condition and are impacted by the economic aspects of care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document