Presenting economic evaluations template

• Previous
• Next

The template is to ensure economic evaluations presented to Working Groups and NACI are standardized, understandable, and of the highest quality.

See in PDF format the Presenting economic evaluations template.

Slide 1:

Title of model-based economic evaluation

[should clearly represent the study question]

Presentation to [WG/ NACI] on [Date]

Author names and affiliations

Can include logos, as desired, to identify affiliation of authors.

Slide 2:

Conflicts of interest and funding

• List any potential conflicts of interest for each author (including financial and intellectual). If there are no potential conflicts of interest, a statement to that effect must be included.
  • ex. Author A: No conflicts of interest.
• Describe how the study was funded and the role of the funder in the identification, design, conduct, and reporting of the analysis. Describe other non-monetary sources.

Slide 3:

Decision problem

• The study question should be well defined, stated in an answerable form and relevant to the decision the target audience is facing.
  • For example: What is the cost-effectiveness of routinely vaccinating population X against Disease Y, using vaccine A compared to the current approach of B?

Slide 4:

Methods

Slide 5:

Population(s) and intervention(s)

• Define the study population(s) for the vaccination program and comparators
  • Include population at risk for the disease, and populations indirectly affected (i.e., by externalities or spillover effects)
  • Specify any subgroups
• Define the interventions to be compared
  • For vaccination program: State the brand and generic names of the vaccine, dosage of vaccine, the number of doses required, dose schedule, whether any booster doses are required, expected dose completion, handling of vaccine wastage, assumptions on waning, coverage estimates
• Define setting(s) for delivery of interventions and comparators

Slide 6:

Study characteristics

• Specify study perspectives
• Specify time horizon and justify
• Specify discount rate used

Slide 7:

Economic model

• Specify type of economic evaluation (i.e., Cost-utility analysis [CUA], Cost-benefit analysis [CBA]) and the summary measure used (e.g., cost per Quality-adjusted life year [QALY])
• Provide schematic of model structure
• Specify study design (e.g., decision tree, Markov cohort model)
• Describe attributes of the model (e.g., static versus dynamic, stochastic versus deterministic) and justify.

Slide 8:

Dynamic model

[Use this slide if a dynamic model was developed separately from the economic model]

• Specify type of dynamic model used (e.g., SIR)
• Describe model (e.g., contact patterns, differential equations if applicable, rules underpinning agent behaviours if applicable, and transmission dynamics over the model time horizon)
• Show a schematic diagram with suitable annotation

Slide 9:

Impact inventory table

• Highlight notable areas of impact included/ excluded in the analysis
  • Screenshot sections of the completed impact inventory table
  • Or list

Slide 10:

Key assumptions

• List key assumptions. They may include:
  • Adequate supply of vaccine
  • Waning vaccine immunity
  • Wastage of vaccine (i.e., sum of vaccines discarded, lost, damaged or destroyed)
  • Assumptions when a vaccine has not yet been developed or data on vaccine efficacy are not in the public domain
  • Assumptions necessary to transfer cost data when they are applied from other countries
  • Assumptions on how many infections are medically attended
  • Assumptions on how disease affects different subpopulations
  • Assumptions on how costs differ across subpopulations

Slide 11:

Health system perspective: key inputs

• Variable
• Description
• Mean
• Range/ Distribution
• Source

[May have >1 of these slides]

Inputs that should always be presented include:

• Disease incidence
• Vaccine efficacy/ effectiveness – provide strength of the evidence, details of clinical studies from which data were used, any extrapolation performed
• Duration of immunity
• Vaccine coverage
• Unit costs of vaccination doses and comparators; other intervention-related costs (e.g., distribution costs, administration costs)

Slide 12:

Societal perspective: key inputs

• Variable
• Description
• Mean
• Range/ Distribution
• Source

[May have >1 of these slides]

Include inputs that were not covered in the health system perspective slide(s)

Slide 13:

Uncertainty

• Describe sensitivity and scenario analyses:
  • State the values and assumptions test
  • Justify

Slide 14:

Equity considerations

• State equity assumptions
• State any equity objectives (e.g., increasing vaccine uptake in specific under-immunized groups)
• Identify the equity-relevant characteristics of the main subgroups that may benefit, or be adversely affected by, the vaccination program, and describe how they were analyzed

Slide 15:

Summary of methods

Analytic technique

Cost-utility analysis

Disease

Pneumococcal disease (pneumonia, otitis media, invasive pneumococcal disease)

Population

Infants

Intervention

PCV13

Comparator(s)

No vaccine

Outcomes

Cases, deaths, QALYs, cost

Perspective

(i) health system, (ii) societal

Time horizon

Lifetime

Discounting

1.5% for costs and outcomes

Uncertainty

Scenario #1, #2

Study design

Decision tree

Slide 16:

Results and discussion

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio

Slide 17:

Results

• Present results for each intervention across all affected populations over entire time horizon:
  1. Outcomes
  2. Costs
  3. Summary measure(s) such as Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICERs) or net monetary/ net health benefit
• Present in disaggregated manner by types of costs and outcomes
• Present mean estimates and precision (e.g., 95% confidence intervals)
• Present results for each perspective
• Results can be summarized in example table on subsequent slide

Slide 18:

Slide 19:

Additional results

[1-2 slides, if needed]

• Consider presenting additional tables and/or graphs (e.g., health production functions, cost-effectiveness efficacy frontiers)
• Consider presenting results for key subgroups such as equity- relevant subgroups

Slide 20:

Uncertainty analyses

[1-2 slides]

• Present results from sensitivity and scenario analyses
• Present uncertainty graphically (e.g., cost-effectiveness plane scatter plots, tornado diagrams, cost-effectiveness acceptability curves, cost- effectiveness acceptability frontier)
• Present influential variables

Slide 21:

Study limitations

• Discuss key limitations (e.g., methodological, validity of assumptions, strength of the data, and relationships or links used in the model)

Slide 22:

Generalizability

• Comment on the generalizability or relevance of results, and the validity of the data and model for the relevant jurisdictions and populations
• Comment on regional differences in terms of disease epidemiology, population characteristics, clinical practice patterns, resource use patterns, unit costs, and other factors of relevance. Where differences exist, discuss the impact on the results (expected direction and magnitude), and the conclusions

Slide 23:

Equity considerations

• Indicate the distributional considerations (e.g., intergenerational effects of the vaccination program)
• List other ethical and equity implications or issues

Slide 24:

Relation to other studies

[if appropriate]

• Compare results to results from other studies, including a discussion on similarities, differences, and significance

Slide 25:

Conclusions

• Summarize the key findings and uncertainty of the economic evaluation

Slide 26:

References

Slide 27:

Supplementary material

Slide 28:

• Can consider presenting model validation results; goodness-of-fit

• Previous
• Next