Search

Rationale: Economic evaluations play an important role in the development and implementation of healthcare innovations. For pharmaceutical products, the methodologies used are laid down in guidelines, whereas for medical technologies the guidelines are not as strenuous. The aim of this review was therefore to analyze what types of methodologies are used in economic evaluations of medical technologies. Methods: We performed a mapping review to identify economic evaluations for medical technologies. We decided to limit our search to one year (2022) and included cost utility and cost effectiveness analyses in which health technologies were evaluated. For each included study we identified the main methodological characteristics. Results: A total of 364 papers were included in the analysis, 268 (74%) contained cost-utility analyses and 91 (25%) cost-effectiveness analyses. A model was used in 236 (64%) analyses, 117 analyses were trial based evaluations. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses and/or bootstrapping was performed in 266 (73%) analyses. Deterministic sensitivity analyses were used in 306 (84%). Time horizon and perspective were underreported in 15–25% of the included studies. Conclusions: This review shows the wide range of methodologies used in economic evaluations as well as the extent and rigor in which these methodologies are used. Many of the included papers did no use or did not sufficiently report the use of appropriate standard methods. This may lead to research waste, a delay in successful implementation of valuable innovations and in the end may delay improvement patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Talent is a crucial resource for economic and social development, serving as the driving force behind urban progress. As China experiences rapid growth in digital city construction, the capability of e-services continues to improve incessantly. In China, the new-generation highly educated migrants (NGHEMs) account for ~ 20–30% of the total floating populations. This study aimed to explore the settlement intention of new-generation highly educated migrations in China from the new perspective of urban e-service capabilities. Furthermore, the mechanism of the urban e-services on the settlement intention on the NGHEMs will be proved. Methods: This paper employed data of China Migrants Dynamic Survey in 2017 and Evaluation Report of Government E-service Capability Index (2017). Descriptive analyses were conducted to investigate the factors influencing the settlement intention of NGHEMs in the destination city. Based on the principle of utility maximization, LASSO regression was employed to select individual and city characteristics that determined the settlement intention of NGHEMs. The impact of urban e-services on settlement intention was analyzed by using ordinal logit model. Additionally, robustness check, endogeneity analysis, and heterogeneity analysis were performed to validate the benchmark regression results. Finally, mediation model was employed to examine whether urban e-services enhance the settlement intention of NGHEMs by improving urban livability and urban innovation. Results: The results indicate that the urban e-services promote the NGHEMs' settlement intention in the destination cities. Moreover, the results are still robust through a series of robustness tests. Furthermore, from the perspective of individual and regional heterogeneity, urban e-services significantly enhances the settlement intention of NGHEMs with male and female, married and urban household registration, and urban e-services can promote the settlement intention of NGHEMs with over 3 million inhabitants and those in the eastern regions of China. Finally, the intermediary effect test shows that urban e-services promote the settlement intention of NGHEMs through urban livability and urban innovation. Conclusion: This study highlights the important impact of urban e-services on the settlement intention of new-generation highly educated migrants. The conclusions of this study provide suggestions for the government to use when designing policies to enhance the settlement intention of the NGHEMs and to improve the development of urban e-services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Human communities suffered a vast socioeconomic burden in dealing with the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) globally. Real-word data about these burdens can inform governments about evidence-based resource allocation and prioritization. The aim of this scoping review was to map the cost-of-illness (CoI) studies associated with COVID-19. Methods: This scoping review was conducted from January 2019 to December 2021. We searched cost-of-illness papers published in English within Web of Sciences, PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Science Direct and ProQuest. For each eligible study, extracted data included country, publication year, study period, study design, epidemiological approach, costing method, cost type, cost identification, sensitivity analysis, estimated unit cost and national burden. All of the analyses were applied in Excel software. Results: 2352 records were found after the search strategy application, finally 28 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Most of the studies were done in the United States, Turkey, and China. The prevalence-based approach was the most common in the studies, and most of studies also used Hospital Information System data (HIS). There were noticeable differences in the costing methods and the cost identification. The average cost of hospitalization per patient per day ranged from 101$ in Turkey to 2,364$ in the United States. Among the studies, 82.1% estimated particularly direct medical costs, 3.6% only indirect costs, and 14.3% both direct and indirect costs. Conclusion: The economic burden of COVID-19 varies from country to country. The majority of CoI studies estimated direct medical costs associated with COVID-19 and there is a paucity of evidence for direct non-medical, indirect, and intangible costs, which we recommend for future studies. To create homogeneity in CoI studies, we suggest researchers follow a conceptual framework and critical appraisal checklist of cost-of-illness (CoI) studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]