Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42711545›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics - open2026

How Applied Researchers Engage with Methodological Tutorials: A Three-step Test Interview Study of an R Tutorial for Trial-Based Economic Evaluation.

Romain Jonathan Collet, Rosa Leek, G Ardine de Wit, Ângela Jornada Ben, Judith Ekkina Bosmans, Johanna Maria van Dongen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics - open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Romain Jonathan ColletDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health research Institute, de Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. r.j.collet@vu.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4621-4077
Rosa LeekDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health research Institute, de Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
G Ardine de WitDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health research Institute, de Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ângela Jornada BenDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health research Institute, de Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Judith Ekkina BosmansDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health research Institute, de Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Johanna Maria van DongenDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health research Institute, de Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

ZonMw 10580012210010
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesMethodological tutorials support the application of statistical methods in health technology assessment. Using an R tutorial for trial-based economic evaluation as a case study, we explored how applied researchers engaged with the tutorial and identified factors influencing its usability and perceived value.

methodsWe conducted a three-step test interview study with applied researchers without experience with the tutorial (n = 17) and semi-structured interviews with applied researchers who had previously used it in their own work (n = 3). Participants worked through the tutorial whilst thinking aloud, followed by focussed and reflective interviews. Qualitative data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

resultsThree themes were generated: (1) 'getting in and getting it to run', describing technical barriers; (2) 'understanding and making sense of what tutorials teach', reflecting challenges in applying methods and interpreting outputs; and (3) 'adapting and applying tutorials in practice', highlighting difficulties modifying code for real-world datasets. Barriers stemmed not only from methodological complexity but also from software setup, unclear terminology, limited coding skills and lack of support. Despite these, participants described tutorials in general as efficient learning tools when clearly structured, transparent and adaptable.

conclusionsWe derived practical considerations that may help improve the accessibility, clarity and adaptability of future methodological tutorials. Methodological tutorials can support the learning and application of statistical methods, but their effective use depends on technical accessibility, user capability and access to support. These findings may inform future tutorial design and the development and validation of more structured guidance, such as a checklist for tutorial development.

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.