ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2025
Challenges and Stimulating Factors for the Incorporation of Economic Considerations in Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Scoping Review.
Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Economic and Resource Use-Related Guidance in US Medical Societies' Clinical Practice Guidelines.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Incorporating economic considerations in clinical practice guideline development: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
RATIONALE, AIMS AND
objectivesThe incorporation of economic considerations in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) could help promote cost-conscious decision-making in healthcare. Though healthcare expenditures increase, and resources are becoming scarcer, the extent to which economic considerations are incorporated into CPGs remains limited. This scoping review aims to identify the challenges and potential stimulating factors to incorporate economic considerations in CPGs.
methodThis scoping review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute Methodology and findings were reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. A systematic search was conducted in eight databases considering literature published from July 2017 and onwards. Data extraction was conducted via an iterative and inductive approach to identify challenges and potential stimulating factors from the included reports. Included documents focused on the (para)medical field and reported on CPG development and economic considerations.
resultsThe search identified 2445 documents from which 33 documents were included for analysis. The analysis identified five challenges: discourse surrounding economic considerations in CPGs, methodological ambiguities, scarcity of (high-quality) economic evidence, transferability of evidence, and resource constraints. Additionally, three potential stimulating factors were identified: acceptance, economic evidence knowledge, and guidance on incorporating economic considerations.
conclusionThese findings reflect the complexity of incorporating economic considerations in CPGs. The identified challenges highlight the need for clearer guidance (i.e. by training) and standardised methodologies for incorporating economic considerations in CPGs. The potential stimulating factors provide a roadmap for future efforts to enhance the integration of economic evidence in CPGs. Collaborative initiatives between health economists, CPG developers, and other stakeholders are essential to drive progress in this area and promote cost-conscious decision-making in healthcare.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.