Quality Evaluation of Domestic Pharmacoeconomic Literatures Based on PEERs in Recent Years
- VernacularTitle:基于PEERs的近年国内药物经济学研究文献质量评估
- Author:
Hailiang GAO
1
;
Tingting JIANG
1
;
Cong ZHANG
1
;
Mengpei ZHANG
1
;
Haoxiang ZHANG
1
;
Zhiheng WANG
1
;
Lizhong DUAN
1
;
Wentao ZHU
1
Author Information
1. School of Management，Beijing University of TCM，Beijing 100029，China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Guidelines for Quality Evaluation of Pharmacoeconomics Evaluation Report;
Pharmacoeconomics;
Literature quality;
Evaluation
- From:
China Pharmacy
2019;30(10):1393-1395
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE： To investigate current status and quality of domestic pharmacoeconomic literatures， and to provide reference for the standardization of pharmacoeconomic research. METHODS： Retrieved from CNKI， Wanfang， VIP and other database， the pharmacoeconomic literatures published from Jan. 2017 to May 2018 were collected. The qualities of literatures were evaluated with Guidelines for Quality Evaluation of Pharmacoeconomics Evaluation Reports （“PEERs” for short）. RESULTS： Totally 160 domestic pharmacoeconomic research literatures were included. The results of PEERs evaluation showed of which the coincidence rate was 32.5％ （52/160）. The literatureswhich were in full compliance （the report had a certain reference value） accounted for 1.3％ （2/160）， which were in basic compliance （the report had certain reference value after being revised） accounted for 31.3％（50/160），which were in non-conformity （the report did not had reference value） accounted for 67.5％（108/160）. Domestic pharmacoeconomic researches were of high quality in terms of research object， evaluation method and content，research purpose， research design and design type， etc.； but the researches were of low quality in terms of research angle， incremental cost/incremental output analysis， sensitivity analysis and other aspects， and there was no explanation or unclear elaboration. CONCLUSIONS： The quality of domestic pharmacoeconomic research literatures are uneven， and their research quality needs to be further improved. It is recommended to standardize the evaluation of pharmacoeconomics， making the evaluation of pharmacoeconomics more scientific and objective.
