Answer To: In this assessment you will apply the concepts you have learnt, to critically assess the published...
Soumi answered on Nov 06 2020
Running Head: CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF AN ECONOMIC EVALUATION 1
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF AN ECONOMIC EVALUATION 9
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF AN ECONOMIC EVALUATION
(For the paper by Luce et al., 2008)
Table of Contents
1. 4
1.1 4
1.2 4
1.3 4
1.4 4
2. 5
2.1 5
2.2 5
2.3 5
3. 6
3.1 6
3.2 6
3.3 6
4. 7
4.1 7
4.2 7
4.3 7
5. 7
5.1 7
5.2 8
5.3 8
6. 8
6.1 8
6.2 9
6.3 9
6.4 9
7. 10
7.1 10
7.2 10
8. 10
8.1 10
9. 10
9.1 10
9.2 11
9.3 11
9.4 11
10. 11
10.1 11
10.2 12
10.3 12
10.4 12
10.5 12
10.6 13
References 14
1.
1.1
YES/NO/CAN'T TELL
In the present study, the authors, Luce et al. (2008), have examined both impacts and expenses of live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) as well as trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) for children aged 24-59months in US. However, the time horizon has not been mentioned, between which the research took place.
1.2
YES/NO/CAN'T TELL
The study by Luce et al. (2008) involved a comparative study between the cost-effectiveness of LAIV and that of the TIV, so that their effectiveness could be assessed for children aged between 2 and 5 years.
1.3
YES/NO/CAN'T TELL
The perspective of the analysis was very clearly stated in the paper, in the form of the research purpose and the objective of the study. As stated by Luce et al. (2008), their aim was to evaluate the cost-effective of LAIV versus TIV, basing on the Comparative Efficacy Study so that public health bodies and vaccine providers could be informed about the appropriate vaccine policy as well as costs for the US children. Therefore, they aptly chose the decision-making context in probability format through quality adjusted life year (QALY) for these children.
1.4
YES/NO/CAN'T TELL
The chosen population of the paper was very clearly defined to be US children aged 24-59months, along with information about their subgroups.
2.
2.1
YES/NO/CAN'T TELL
In the paper by Luce et al. (2008), there could not be clearly detected if there were any omissions of alternatives or not. Although the authors did consider a range of circumstances and clinical events for the subject of the research; however, as supported by Briggs and Gray (1999), the basic format of giving vaccines to the children against influenza is either live attenuated vaccines or inactivated ones. Hence, no other alternatives could be found in the paper.
2.2
YES/NO/CAN'T TELL
No ‘Do nothing’ alternative was considered in the research by Luce et al. (2008) because in the US, the system of vaccination against influenza is a core process of the public health. As mentioned by Drummond and Sculpher (2005), every child within 2 to 5 years of age are to be compulsorily vaccinated against influenza; nevertheless either in LAIV format or TIV format.
2.3
YES/NO/CAN'T TELL
Luce et al. (2008) initially considered 6-71months aged children for their research, which showed efficiency of only 52%, while their further attempt with 6-17years aged children showed only 32% efficacy. Therefore, finally, when they got 54% efficiency rate with children aged 24-59months; they proceeded with them as their research subject.
3.
3.1
YES/NO/CAN'T TELL
The vaccination process was established through a randomised control clinical trial only. Through this test, it was clearly depicted that children in the US are given vaccines in either of the two forms—LAIV or TIV. Of this, LAIV showed 54% efficiency over TIV, thus, suggesting to be used regularly.
3.2
YES/NO/CAN'T TELL
In the paper by Luce et al. (2008), the method of collecting and summarising the data did not take place through systematic overview of clinical studies. Rather, it was an experimental study conducted through randomised controlled trial based on QALY probability method. It was an appropriate method to conduct the research in an economically feasible way because as supported by Severens and Milne (2004), public health issues should be analysed for their suitable solution through practical research methods only, rather than basing on previous literatures.
3.3
YES/NO/CAN'T TELL
The paper did not follow any assumption, as it was a well-established intervention to influenza. Nevertheless, the research findings...