Abstract
Health economic evaluations are comparative analyses of alternative courses of action
in terms of their costs and consequences. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation
Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement, published in 2013, was created to ensure health
economic evaluations are identifiable, interpretable, and useful for decision making.
It was intended as guidance to help authors report accurately which health interventions
were being compared and in what context, how the evaluation was undertaken, what the
findings were, and other details that may aid readers and reviewers in interpretation
and use of the study. The new CHEERS 2022 statement replaces previous CHEERS reporting
guidance. It reflects the need for guidance that can be more easily applied to all
types of health economic evaluation, new methods and developments in the field, as
well as the increased role of stakeholder involvement including patients and the public.
It is also broadly applicable to any form of intervention intended to improve the
health of individuals or the population, whether simple or complex, and without regard
to context (such as health care, public health, education, social care, etc). This
summary article presents the new CHEERS 2022 28-item checklist and recommendations
for each item. The CHEERS 2022 statement is primarily intended for researchers reporting
economic evaluations for peer reviewed journals as well as the peer reviewers and
editors assessing them for publication. However, we anticipate familiarity with reporting
requirements will be useful for analysts when planning studies. It may also be useful
for health technology assessment bodies seeking guidance on reporting, as there is
an increasing emphasis on transparency in decision making.
Key words
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Clinical TherapeuticsAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Economic evaluation in global perspective: a bibliometric analysis of the recent literature.Health Econ. 2016; 25: 9-28
- The changing face of the cost-utility literature, 1990-2012.Value Health. 2015; 18: 271-277
- Growth and capacity for cost-effectiveness analysis in Africa.Health Econ. 2020; 29: 945-954
- ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines-CHEERS Good Reporting Practices Task Force. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS)–explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force.Value Health. 2013; 16: 231-250
- Reporting guidelines of health research studies are frequently used inappropriately.J Clin Epidemiol. 2020; 122: 87-94
- Adherence to the iDSI reference case among published cost-per-DALY averted studies.PLoS One. 2019; 14e0205633
- Task Force on Principles for Economic Analysis of Health Care Technology. Economic analysis of health care technology. A report on principles.Ann Intern Med. 1995; 123: 61-70
- Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine.Oxford University Press, 1996
- The BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ.BMJ. 1996; 313: 275-283
- Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses.JAMA. 1996; 276: 1339-1341
- Reporting format for economic evaluation. Part II: Focus on modelling studies.Pharmacoeconomics. 1998; 14: 259-268
- Design, execution, interpretation, and reporting of economic evaluation studies in obstetrics.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 191: 1070-1076
- Increasing the generalizability of economic evaluations: recommendations for the design, analysis, and reporting of studies.Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005; 21: 165-171
- Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials II-An ISPOR Good Research Practices Task Force report.Value Health. 2015; 18: 161-172
- Evidence and Value: Impact on DEcisionMaking–the EVIDEM framework and potential applications.BMC Health Serv Res. 2008; 8: 270
- Guidelines for conducting and reporting economic evaluation of fall prevention strategies.Osteoporos Int. 2011; 22: 2449-2459
- Economic evaluation alongside randomised controlled trials: design, conduct, analysis, and reporting.BMJ. 2011; 342: d1548
- Economic evaluation using decision analytical modelling: design, conduct, analysis, and reporting.BMJ. 2011; 342: d1766
- Adapting the CHEERS Statement for reporting cost-benefit analysis.Pharmacoeconomics. 2015; 33: 533-534
- Best practices for conducting economic evaluations in health care: a systematic review of quality assessment tools.Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. 2012;
- The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis.JAMA. 1999; 282: 1054-1060
- Recommendations for conduct, methodological practices, and reporting of cost-effectiveness analyses: second panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine.JAMA. 2016; 316: 1093-1103
CADTH.ca. Guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies: Canada. 2015. https://www.cadth.ca/about-cadth/how-we-do-it/methods-and-guidelines/guidelines-for-the-economic-evaluation-of-health-technologies-canada.
EUnetHTA European Network for Health Technology Assessment. Practical considerations when critically assessing economic evaluations. Guidance document. 2021. https://eunethta.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/EUnetHTA-JA3WP6B2-5-Guidance-Critical-Assessment-EE_v1-0.pdf.
- Health economics analysis plans: Where are we now?.Value Health. 2016; 19: A397
- Benefits, challenges and potential strategies of open source health economic models.Pharmacoeconomics. 2017; 35: 125-128
- Developing open-source models for the US health system: practical experiences and challenges to date with the open-source value project.Pharmacoeconomics. 2019; 37: 1313-1320
- Making health economic models Shiny: A tutorial.Wellcome Open Res. 2020; 5: 69
ISPOR. Open source models. https://www.ispor.org/member-groups/special-interest-groups/open-source-models.
- A call for open-source cost-effectiveness analysis.Ann Intern Med. 2017; 167: 432-433
WHO. WHO guide for standardization of economic evaluations of immunization programmes. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-IVB-19.10.
- Economic analysis of vaccination programs: An ISPOR Good Practices for Outcomes Research Task Force Report.Value Health. 2018; 21: 1133-1149
- The International Decision Support Initiative reference case for economic evaluation: an aid to thought.Value Health. 2016; 19: 921-928
- Explicit incorporation of equity considerations into economic evaluation of public health interventions.Health Econ Policy Law. 2009; 4: 231-245
- Distributional cost-effectiveness analysis comes of age.Value Health. 2021; 24: 118-120
- Patient and public involvement in health economics and outcomes research.Patient. 2021; 14: 379-380
- Contribution of stakeholder engagement to the impact of a health technology assessment: an Irish case study.Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2017; 33: 424-429
- Involving patients in health economics research: “The PACTS Principles”.Patient. 2021; 14: 429-434
- Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) Explanation and Elaboration: A report of the ISPOR CHEERS II Good Practices Task Force.Value Health. 2022; 25 (XX-XX)
- Criteria and Process for Initiating and Developing an ISPOR Good Practices Task Force Report.Value Health. 2020; 23: 409-415
- Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines.PLoS Med. 2010; 7e1000217
- GRIPP2 reporting checklists: tools to improve reporting of patient and public involvement in research.BMJ. 2017; 358: j3453
- Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes.4th ed. Oxford University Press, 2015
- Budget impact analysis-principles of good practice: report of the ISPOR 2012 Budget Impact Analysis Good Practice II Task Force.Value Health. 2014; 17: 5-14
- Constrained optimization methods in health services research-an introduction: Report 1 of the ISPOR Optimization Methods Emerging Good Practices Task Force.Value Health. 2017; 20: 310-319
- Principles for deliberative processes in health technology assessment.Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2020; : 1-8
ISPOR. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). https://www.ispor.org/CHEERS.
- A history of the evolution of guidelines for reporting medical research: the long road to the EQUATOR Network.J R Soc Med. 2016; 109: 67-77
- Reproducible research practices, openness and transparency in health economic evaluations: study protocol for a cross-sectional comparative analysis.BMJ Open. 2020; 10e034463
- Translation and validation of study instruments for cross-cultural research.Gastroenterology. 2004; 126: S124-S128
Article info
Publication history
Published online: February 12, 2022
Footnotes
This article is a joint publication by Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, BJOG, BMC Health Services Research, BMC Medicine, BMC Public Health, BMJ, Clinical Therapeutics, Health Policy Open, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Journal of Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy, Journal of Medical Economics, MDM Policy & Practice, Pharmacoeconomics, The European Journal of Health Economics, Value in Health, and Value in Health Regional (en español). Each publisher holds its own copyright or has licensed the content for use, with the authors retaining copyright. The BMJ managed the peer-review process for this article on behalf of all journals. This article is published under the Creative Commons CC-BY license.
