Skip to main content

Table 1 Results

From: Economics methods in Cochrane systematic reviews of health promotion and public health related interventions

No.

Approach to incorporating economics studies and/or data

Analysis of economics studies and/or data

Other issues relevant to economics methods

 

Review aims to include economics studies

Review aims to incorporate formal economic evaluation methods

Review includes a specific economic question

Review specifies one or more economic variable(s) as a review outcome

Review identified no primary studies incorporating economic evaluation methods or other economic analyses

Review includes a narrative summary of economics data extracted from included studies

Review incorporates a quantitative synthesis of economic variables extracted from included studies

Review incorporates a search of one or more specialist databases of economics studies (e.g. NHS EED)

(Further) potentially relevant economic evaluation studies identified by initial NHS EED searches for potential inclusion in an updated review

Reviewers suggest that economic analyses of the intervention were not appropriate due to a lack of conclusive evidence on intervention effectiveness

Overall effectiveness results (primary outcomes)

Reviewers highlight a need for primary economic evaluation studies

22

•

 

•

 

•

     

No evidence

•

23

•

 

•

  

•

  

•

•

No clear evidence of effectiveness

 

24

        

n/a

 

Evidence of a positive effect

 

25

•

  

•

 

•

    

Evidence of a positive effect

•

26

    

•

   

n/a

•

No clear evidence of effectiveness

 

27

•

 

•

•

•

     

No clear evidence of effectiveness

•

28

        

n/a

 

Evidence of a positive effect

 

29

        

n/a

 

No evidence

•

30

•

  

•

•

   

•

 

Good evidence of effectiveness

•

31

     

•

    

Evidence of mixed effectiveness

•

32

          

No evidence

•

33

•

  

•

 

•

 

•

  

Evidence of mixed effectiveness

•

34

        

n/a

 

Evidence of mixed effectiveness

•

35

•

  

•

 

•

  

•

 

No evidence

 

36

        

n/a

 

Some evidence of ineffectiveness

 

37

        

n/a

 

Weak evidence of a positive effect

 

38

        

n/a

 

Strong evidence of effectiveness

•

39

•

  

•

•

     

No evidence

 

40

•

  

•

•

  

Not Clear

•

•

No evidence

 

41

            

42

•

 

•

 

•

 

•

  

•

  

Total

10

0

4

7

6

6

0

1

5

3

-

11

43

    

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

44

    

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

45

    

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

46

•

 

•

 

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

47

•

 

•

•

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

48

•

 

•

•

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

49

•

 

•

•

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Total

4

0

4

3

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Back to article page

BMC Medical Research Methodology

ISSN: 1471-2288

Contact us