Criteria list for assessment of methodological quality of economic evaluations: Consensus on Health Economic Criteria The authors thank the following persons for their participation in the Delphi panel

Silvia Evers, Marï elle Goossens, Henrica de Vet, Maurits van Tulder, D Banta, M Buxton, D Coyle, C Donaldson, M Drummond, A Elixhauser, B Jönsson, E Jonsson, K Kesteloot, B Luce, D Menon, M Mugford, E Nord, J Rovira, L Russell, F RuttenG Simon, J Sisk, R Taylor, G Torrance, A Towse, L Vale

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterAcademicpeer-review


Objectives: The aim of the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria (CHEC) project is to develop a criteria list for assessment of the methodological quality of economic evaluations in systematic reviews. The criteria list resulting from this CHEC project should be regarded as a minimum standard. Methods: The criteria list has been developed using a Delphi method. Three Delphi rounds were needed to reach consensus. Twenty-three international experts participated in the Delphi panel. Results: The Delphi panel achieved consensus over a generic core set of items for the quality assessment of economic evaluations. Each item of the CHEC-list was formulated as a question that can be answered by yes or no. To standardize the interpretation of the list and facilitate its use, the project team also provided an operationalization of the criteria list items. Conclusions: There was consensus among a group of international experts regarding a core set of items that can be used to assess the quality of economic evaluations in systematic reviews. Using this checklist will make future systematic reviews of economic evaluations more transparent, informative, and comparable. Consequently, researchers and policy-makers might use these systematic reviews more easily. The CHEC-list can be downloaded freely from manageably large number of trials and economic evaluations of health care interventions. Systematic reviews of these stud-ies can help in making well-informed decisions on which intervention to adopt. For maximum usefulness, systematic reviews of economic evaluations should be transparent, that is, all relevant methodological information from the included studies should be described in a systematic way. However, there is no generally accepted criteria list for reviewing eco-nomic evaluations, which may be because most of the criteria lists are created single-handed. The aim of the Consensus on
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationInternational Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
Number of pages6
Publication statusPublished - 2016
Externally publishedYes

Publication series

NameInternational Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Cite this