Appraisal of: Wood H, Arber, M, Glanville J. Information resources used in published systematic reviews of economic evaluations [poster].

Short description: 

This study examined the search methods of recent systematic reviews (SRs) of economic evaluations (EEs) to evaluate whether the sources searched to identify studies reflected current recommendations. A pragmatic search was conducted in Ovid MEDLINE to identify English SRs of EEs published since January 2013. For reviews that met inclusion criteria, two reviewers extracted data on: which general medical and specialised economic databases were searched, the HTA sources searched, and any additional sources or search techniques employed. Results were compared against NICE's economic search requirements for single technology appraisals and the resources recommended in the costs and economic evaluation chapter of SuRe Info.  42 reviews were selected for inclusion. 5 of these reviews searched all of the resources required for NICE submissions, while 9 searched at least 4 of the 6 resource types recommended by SuRe Info. None of the studies searched all 6 types of the search resources recommended by SuRe Info. These results suggest that the majority of SRs of EEs do not meet the current recommendations for identifying economic evidence. 

Limitations stated by the author(s): 

Since a pragmatic search was used to identify articles in the sample, it is possible that some relevant systematic reviews were not included in the analysis.

Because of frequent mistakes and ambiguity in the reporting of database and interface names in the included reviews, the authors had to make some assumptions about which resources were searched. It is possible that the use of both NHS EED and the HTA Database was overestimated as a result of reviews reporting only that "The Cochrane Library", which contains both databases, was searched. 

Limitations stated by the reviewer(s): 
No additional limitations detected by the reviewer.
Study Type: 
Single study