Personal Research Database

Title: Vakuum-Technik

ISO Abbreviated Title:

JCR Abbreviated Title: Vakuum-Tech

ISSN:

Journal Country/Territory:

Language:

Publisher:

Publisher Address:

Subject Categories:

: Impact Factor

Gottwald, B.A., Haul, R. and Roth, W. (1973), Studies of adsorption kinetics by means of molecular flow experiments. Vakuum-Technik, 22 (1), 6-9.

? Besocke, K. and Berger, S. (1978), Influence of monoatomic steps on adsorption-kinetics of oxygen on tungsten. Vakuum-Technik, 27 (3), 66-70.

Title: Value in Health

ISO Abbreviated Title:

JCR Abbreviated Title:

ISSN: 1098-3015

Issues/Year:

Journal Country

Language:

Publisher:

Publisher Address:

Subject Categories:

: Impact Factor

? Ungar, W.J. and Santos, M.T. (2003), The Pediatric Quality Appraisal Questionnaire: An instrument for evaluation of the pediatric health economics literature. Value in Health, 6 (5), 584-594.

Full Text: 2003\Val Hea6, 584.pdf

Abstract: Objectives: Currently there is no tool available to adequately appraise the quality of the pediatric health economics literature. A comprehensive pediatric-specific instrument would be valuable in informing allocation decisions related to pediatric interventions and services. The goal of this study was to develop the Pediatric Quality Appraisal Questionnaire (PQAQ). Methods: A draft instrument was constructed from published checklists and questionnaires. New questions pertaining to the pediatric population were incorporated. An expert panel reviewed the draft instrument and the proposed scoring scheme for face and content validity. A revised version was pilot tested by three independent appraisers. After addressing discrepancies in scores, a final version was created and subjected to interrater and test-retest reliability assessment. Results: The 57 items in the final PQAQ were mapped onto 14 domains: economic evaluation, comparators, tar-get population, time horizon, perspective, costs and resource use, outcomes, quality of life, analysis, discounting, incremental analysis, sensitivity analysis, conflict of interest, and conclusions. Among the 57 items, 46 have response options that are scored from 0 to 1. Interrater reliability was 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-0.81) and test-retest reliability was 0.92 (95% CI 0.71-0.98). Conclusions: The PQAQ is a comprehensive instrument demonstrating face and content validity and strong interrater and test-retest reliability in the appraisal of pediatric economic evaluations. This tool will be valuable to health economists, methods researchers, and policy decision makers involved in allocation decisions for pediatric health care.

Keywords: Allocation, Analysis, Assessment, Care, Confidence, Conflict of Interest, Constructed, Costs, Decision, Economic, Economic Evaluation, Economics, Evaluation, Expert Panel, Health, Health Care, Health Economics, Interval, Interventions, Life, Literature, Methods, Options, Outcomes, Pediatric, Pilot, Policy, Policy Decision, Population, Quality, Quality of, Quality of Life, Questionnaires, Reliability, Resource Use, Sensitivity, Sensitivity Analysis, Services, Test-Retest, Validity, Version

? Neumann, P.J., Greenberg, D., Olchanski, N.V., Stone, P.W. and Rosen, A.B. (2005), Growth and quality of the cost-utility literature, 1976-2001. Value in Health, 8 (1), 3-9.

Full Text: 2005\Val Hea8, 3.pdf

Abstract: Purpose: Cost-utility analyses (CUAs) have become increasingly popular, although questions persist about their comparability and credibility. Our objectives were to: 1) describe the growth and characteristics of CUAs published in the peer-reviewed literature through 2001; 2) investigate whether CUA quality has improved over time; 3) examine whether quality varies by the experience of journals in publishing CUAs, or the source of external funding for study investigators; and 4) examine changes in practices in US-based studies following recommendations of the US Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine (USPCEHM). This study updates and expands our previous work, which examined CUAs through 1997. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of the English-language medical literature for original CUAs published from 1976 through 2001, using MEDLINE and other databases. Each study was audited independently by two trained readers, who recorded the methodological and reporting practices used. Results: Our review identified 533 original CUAs. Comparing articles published in 1998 to 2001 (n = 305) with those published in 1976 to 1997 (n = 228), studies improved in almost all categories, including: clearly presenting the study perspective (73% vs. 52%, P < 0.001); discounting both costs and quality-adjusted life-years (82% vs. 73%, P = 0.0115); and reporting incremental cost-utility ratios (69% vs. 46%, P < 0.001). The proportion of studies disclosing funding sources did not change (65% vs. 65%, P = 0.939). Adherence to recommended practices was greater in more experienced journals, and roughly equal in industry versus non-industry-funded analyses. The data suggest an impact in methodological practices used in US-based CUAs in accordance with recommendations of the USPCEHM. Conclusions: Adherence to methodological and reporting practices in published CUAs is improving, although many studies still omit basic elements. Medical journals, particularly those with little experience publishing cost-effectiveness analyses, should adopt and enforce standard protocols for conducting and reporting CUAs.

Keywords: Analyses, Changes, Characteristics, Cost Effectiveness, Cost-Effectiveness, Cost-Utility, Costs, Credibility, Data, Databases, Experience, Funding, Growth, Impact, Journals, Literature, Medical, Medical Literature, P, Peer-Reviewed, Practices, Protocols, Publishing, Quality, Quality of, Recommendations, Reporting, Review, Source, Sources, Standard, US, Work

? Siegel, J.E., Byron, S.C. and Lawrence, W.F. (2005), Federal sponsorship of cost-effectiveness and related research in health care: 1997-2001. Value in Health, 8 (3), 223-236.

Full Text: 2005\Val Hea8, 223.pdf

Abstract: Objectives: To describe recent federal sponsorship of cost-effectiveness and related health economics research to provide insight into the functioning of existing research support systems and assess the roles of federal health agencies. Methods: Using the PubMed database, we identified cost-effectiveness and related publications citing support from a US government entity and published during the period of 1997 through 2001, and audited them for information on funding sources, study type, and content focus. Results: Five Department of Health and Human Services agencies and centers and the Veterans Administration are cited as funders in 74% of 520 federally supported health economics publications we identified. Three-fourths of federally supported publications address five areas of high disease burden: infections, cancer, HIV/AIDS, cardiovascular disease, and substance abuse. Other high burden diseases, including mental health, diabetes, and injuries, receive less attention. Federal support of health economics studies of health education and care delivery-intervention types underexamined in the field-is relatively strong but most often focuses on substance abuse or mental health services. Each of the top federal funders has a distinct funding pattern, but there are substantial areas of overlap within which we could not identify content domains specific to one funder or another. Conclusions: Federal support of health economics research has paralleled growth in the field. Federal funders support projects consistent with their mission and focus on high-burden disease areas. However, overlapping funding areas, ambiguity concerning agency interests within overlapping content areas, and gaps in some disease and intervention areas suggest that the coordination of health economics research funding could be improved.

Keywords: Abuse, Burden, Cancer, Cardiovascular, Cardiovascular Disease, Care, Cost Effectiveness, Cost-Effectiveness, Database, Diabetes, Disease, Diseases, Economics, Education, Field, Funding, Growth, Health, Health Care, Health Economics, Health Education, Health Services, HIV, AIDS, Infections, Information, Intervention, Mental Health, Overlapping, Pattern, Publications, PUBMED, Research, Research Funding, Research Support, Services, Sources, Substance Abuse, Support, Systems, US

? Greenberg, D., Rosen, A.B., Palmer, J.A., Wacht, O. and Neumann, P.J. (2008), 30 years of cost-effectiveness analyses: A bibliometric review of articles published in the economic and medical literature: 1976-2005. Value in Health, 11 (3), A172.

Full Text: Val Hea11, A172.pdf

Keywords: Analyses, Bibliometric, Cost Effectiveness, Cost-Effectiveness, Economic, Literature, Medical, Medical Literature, Review

Au, F., Prahardhi, S. and Shiell, A. (2008), Reliability of two instruments for critical assessment of economic evaluations. Value in Health, 11 (3), 435-439.

Full Text: 2008\Val Hea11, 435.pdf

Abstract: Objective: To assess the reliability of two instruments designed for critical appraisal of economic evaluations: the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) scale and the Pediatric Quality Appraisal Questionnaire (PQAQ). Methods: Thirty published articles were chosen at random from a recent bibliography of economic evaluations in health promotion. The quality of each of these studies was assessed independently by two raters using each of the two instruments. Inter-rater reliability and the agreement between the instruments were measured using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Cronbach’s generalizability theory was also used to assess the sources of variation in quality scores of the studies and to indicate where improvements in reliability could best be made. Results: Inter-rater reliability was excellent for both instruments (ICC = 0.81 for the QHES and 0.80 for the PQAQ).Agreement between the instruments varied (ICC = 0.77 for rater 1 and 0.56 for rater 2). The biggest source of variation in the scores assigned to the articles was the quality of the study (56% of total variance). Conventional measurement error explained 31% of the total variance. Variation due to rater (< 0.1%) and measurement instrument (1.8%) was very low. Conclusions: The results suggest that the two instruments perform equally well. Choice of instrument can therefore be based on other criteria-simplicity and speed of application in the case of one, and detail in the information provided in the case of the other. There is little improvement in reliability to be gained from using more than one rater or more than one assessment of quality.

Keywords: Application, Assessment, Bibliography, Correlation, Correlation Coefficient, Economic, Error, Health, Health Promotion, Improvement, Information, Measurement, Promotion, Quality, Quality of, Reliability, Scale, Source, Sources, Theory

? Solans, M., Pane, S., Estrada, M.D., Serra-Sutton, V., Berra, S., Herdman, M., Alonso, J. and Rajmil, L. (2008), Health-related quality of life measurement in children and adolescents: A systematic review of generic and disease-specific instruments. Value in Health, 11 (4), 742-764.

Full Text: 2008\Val Hea11, 742.pdf

Abstract: Objective: To identify currently available generic and disease-specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instruments for children and adolescents up to 19 years old, to describe their content, and to review their psychometric properties. Study Design: Previous reviews on the subject and a new literature review from 2001 to December 2006 (MEDLINE, the ISI Science Citation Index, HealthSTAR and PsycLit) were used to identify measures of HRQOL for children and adolescents. The characteristics (country of origin, age range, type of respondent, number of dimensions and items, name of the dimensions and condition) and psychometric properties (reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change) of the instruments were assessed following international guidelines published by the Scientific Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust. Results: In total, 30 generic and 64 disease-specific instruments were identified, 51 of which were published between 2001 and 2005. Many generic measures cover a core set of basic concepts related to physical, mental and social health, although the number and name of dimensions varies substantially. The lower age limit for self-reported instruments was 5-6 years old. Generic measures developed recently focused on both child self-report and parent-proxy report, although 26% of the disease-specific questionnaires were exclusively addressed to proxy-respondents. Most questionnaires had tested internal consistency (67%) and to a lesser extent test-retest stability (44.7%). Most questionnaires reported construct validity, but few instruments analyzed criterion validity (n = 5), structural validity (n = 15) or sensitivity to change (n = 14). Conclusions: The development of HRQOL instruments for children and adolescents has continued apace in recent years, particularly with regard to disease-specific questionnaires. Many of the instruments meet accepted standards for psychometric properties, although instrument developers should include children from the beginning of the development process and need to pay particular attention to testing sensitivity to change.

Keywords: Adolescents, Characteristics, Children, Citation, Core, Core Scales, Health, Health-Related Quality of Life, Initial Validation, ISI, Juvenile Rheumatoid-Arthritis, Literature, Literature Review, Measurement, Measurement Model, Medline, Otitis-Media, Perceived Illness Experience, Preschool-Children, Psychometric Properties, Questionnaires, Reliability, Review, Science, Science Citation Index, Short-Form, Standards, Systematic Review, VSP-A

? Erntoft, S. (2011), Pharmaceutical priority setting and the use of health economic evaluations: A systematic literature review. Value in Health, 14 (4), 587-599.

Full Text: 2011\Val Hea14, 587.pdf

Abstract: Objectives: To investigate which factors and criteria are used in priority setting of pharmaceuticals, in what contexts health economic evaluations are used, and barriers to the use of health economic evaluations at micro, meso, and macro health-care levels. Methods: The search for empirical articles was based on the MeSH index (Medical Substance Heading), including the search terms “economic evaluation,” “cost-effectiveness analysis,” “cost-utility analysis,” “cost-benefit analysis,” “pharmacoeconomic,” AND “drug cost(s),” AND “eligibility determination,” AND “decision-making,” AND “rationing,” AND formulary. The following databases were searched: PubMed, EconLit, Cochrane, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. More than 3100 studies were identified, 31 of which were included in this review. Results: The use of health economic evaluations at all three health-care levels was investigated in three countries (United States [US], United Kingdom [UK], and Sweden). Postal and telephone survey methods dominated (n = 17) followed by interviews (n = 13), document analysis (n = 10), and observations of group deliberations (n = 9). The cost-effectiveness criterion was most important at the macro level. A number of contextual uses of health economic evaluations were identified, including importantly the legitimizing of decisions, structuring the priority-setting process, and requesting additional budgets to finance expensive pharmaceuticals. Conclusion: Factors that seem to support the increased use of health economic evaluations are well-developed frameworks for evaluations, the presence of health economic skills, and an explicit priority-setting process. Differences in how economic evaluations are used at macro, meso, and micro levels are attributed to differences in the preconditions at each level.

Keywords: Analysis, Articles, Attitudes, Author, Barriers, Cochrane, Committees, Cost-Effectiveness, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis, Countries, Databases, Differences, Economic Evaluation, Evaluations, Factors, Formulary Decision-Making, Health, Health Care, Hospital Drug Formulary, Impact, Interviews, Literature, Literature Review, Managed Care Pharmacy, Management, Methods, Pharmaceutical, Pharmaceuticals, Pharmacoeconomic Data, Priority, Priority Setting, Process, Pubmed, Reimbursement, Review, S, Science, Survey, Systematic, Therapy, United Kingdom, United States, Web of Science, Web-of-Science