Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > MORECare research methods guidance development:...
View graph of relations

MORECare research methods guidance development: recommendations for health economic evaluations in palliative and end of life care research

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineMeeting abstractpeer-review

Published

Standard

MORECare research methods guidance development: recommendations for health economic evaluations in palliative and end of life care research. / Preston, Nancy; Short, V.; Hollingworth, W. et al.
In: Palliative Medicine, Vol. 26, No. 4, 06.2012, p. 541.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineMeeting abstractpeer-review

Harvard

Preston, N, Short, V, Hollingworth, W, McCrone, P, Grande, G, Evans, C, Anscombe, E, Benalia, H, Higginson, IJ & Todd, C 2012, 'MORECare research methods guidance development: recommendations for health economic evaluations in palliative and end of life care research', Palliative Medicine, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 541. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269216312446391

APA

Preston, N., Short, V., Hollingworth, W., McCrone, P., Grande, G., Evans, C., Anscombe, E., Benalia, H., Higginson, I. J., & Todd, C. (2012). MORECare research methods guidance development: recommendations for health economic evaluations in palliative and end of life care research. Palliative Medicine, 26(4), 541. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269216312446391

Vancouver

Preston N, Short V, Hollingworth W, McCrone P, Grande G, Evans C et al. MORECare research methods guidance development: recommendations for health economic evaluations in palliative and end of life care research. Palliative Medicine. 2012 Jun;26(4):541. doi: 10.1177/0269216312446391

Author

Bibtex

@article{03dfdf1d177c4fa4b4fac92d70126b7e,
title = "MORECare research methods guidance development: recommendations for health economic evaluations in palliative and end of life care research",
abstract = "Aims: To identify agreed best practice for health economicevaluation in palliative and end of life (P&EoLC) research.Methods: We used the MORECare Transparent ExpertConsultation approach to conduct consultation workshopswith experts in health economics in P&EoLC research.Prior to workshops participants were sent overviewsof pertinent issues in health economics in P&EoLC.Following workshop presentations and discussion,nominal group techniques were used to produce candidaterecommendations. These were subsequently rated onlineby participating experts. Descriptive statistics were usedto permit analysis of consensus and rated importance.Narrative comments were collated.Results: The workshop comprised 28 participants making27 recommendations. The top three recommendations were:1. The need to develop robust methods for assessingoutcomes which take into account preferences and theway these change over time.2. Researchers should give consideration to the implicationsof decisions on the equitable distribution of care.3. Costing should be from the societal perspective and aswell as statutory services include costs of other formalcare (e.g. hospices and third sector) and informal careunless a clear rationale for using a different perspectiveis provided.The main area which failed to reach consensus were on theuse of Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and whetherindividual opportunity costs should be used to measure thecosts of informal care.Conclusions: When designing studies in P&EoLC it isrecommended that outcome measures are responsive overtime and costings should come from a societal perspectivetaking into account the equitable distribution of care. Moreresearch is needed given the lack of consensus in this areaso that future recommendations can be made.",
author = "Nancy Preston and V. Short and W. Hollingworth and P. McCrone and G. Grande and C. Evans and E. Anscombe and H. Benalia and Higginson, {I. J.} and C. Todd",
year = "2012",
month = jun,
doi = "10.1177/0269216312446391",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "541",
journal = "Palliative Medicine",
issn = "0269-2163",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - MORECare research methods guidance development: recommendations for health economic evaluations in palliative and end of life care research

AU - Preston, Nancy

AU - Short, V.

AU - Hollingworth, W.

AU - McCrone, P.

AU - Grande, G.

AU - Evans, C.

AU - Anscombe, E.

AU - Benalia, H.

AU - Higginson, I. J.

AU - Todd, C.

PY - 2012/6

Y1 - 2012/6

N2 - Aims: To identify agreed best practice for health economicevaluation in palliative and end of life (P&EoLC) research.Methods: We used the MORECare Transparent ExpertConsultation approach to conduct consultation workshopswith experts in health economics in P&EoLC research.Prior to workshops participants were sent overviewsof pertinent issues in health economics in P&EoLC.Following workshop presentations and discussion,nominal group techniques were used to produce candidaterecommendations. These were subsequently rated onlineby participating experts. Descriptive statistics were usedto permit analysis of consensus and rated importance.Narrative comments were collated.Results: The workshop comprised 28 participants making27 recommendations. The top three recommendations were:1. The need to develop robust methods for assessingoutcomes which take into account preferences and theway these change over time.2. Researchers should give consideration to the implicationsof decisions on the equitable distribution of care.3. Costing should be from the societal perspective and aswell as statutory services include costs of other formalcare (e.g. hospices and third sector) and informal careunless a clear rationale for using a different perspectiveis provided.The main area which failed to reach consensus were on theuse of Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and whetherindividual opportunity costs should be used to measure thecosts of informal care.Conclusions: When designing studies in P&EoLC it isrecommended that outcome measures are responsive overtime and costings should come from a societal perspectivetaking into account the equitable distribution of care. Moreresearch is needed given the lack of consensus in this areaso that future recommendations can be made.

AB - Aims: To identify agreed best practice for health economicevaluation in palliative and end of life (P&EoLC) research.Methods: We used the MORECare Transparent ExpertConsultation approach to conduct consultation workshopswith experts in health economics in P&EoLC research.Prior to workshops participants were sent overviewsof pertinent issues in health economics in P&EoLC.Following workshop presentations and discussion,nominal group techniques were used to produce candidaterecommendations. These were subsequently rated onlineby participating experts. Descriptive statistics were usedto permit analysis of consensus and rated importance.Narrative comments were collated.Results: The workshop comprised 28 participants making27 recommendations. The top three recommendations were:1. The need to develop robust methods for assessingoutcomes which take into account preferences and theway these change over time.2. Researchers should give consideration to the implicationsof decisions on the equitable distribution of care.3. Costing should be from the societal perspective and aswell as statutory services include costs of other formalcare (e.g. hospices and third sector) and informal careunless a clear rationale for using a different perspectiveis provided.The main area which failed to reach consensus were on theuse of Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and whetherindividual opportunity costs should be used to measure thecosts of informal care.Conclusions: When designing studies in P&EoLC it isrecommended that outcome measures are responsive overtime and costings should come from a societal perspectivetaking into account the equitable distribution of care. Moreresearch is needed given the lack of consensus in this areaso that future recommendations can be made.

U2 - 10.1177/0269216312446391

DO - 10.1177/0269216312446391

M3 - Meeting abstract

VL - 26

SP - 541

JO - Palliative Medicine

JF - Palliative Medicine

SN - 0269-2163

IS - 4

ER -