Article Text
Abstract
Introduction Dementia is one of the greatest health challenges the world will face in the coming decades, as it is one of the principal causes of disability and dependency among older people. Economic modelling is used widely across many health conditions to inform decisions on health and social care policy and practice. The aim of this literature review is to systematically identify, review and critically evaluate existing health economics models in dementia. We included the full spectrum of dementia, including Alzheimer’s disease (AD), from preclinical stages through to severe dementia and end of life. This review forms part of the Real world Outcomes across the Alzheimer’s Disease spectrum for better care: multimodal data Access Platform (ROADMAP) project.
Methods and analysis Electronic searches were conducted in Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica dataBASE, Economic Literature Database, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, Research Papers in Economics, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, Science Citation Index, Turning Research Into Practice and Open Grey for studies published between January 2000 and the end of June 2017. Two reviewers will independently assess each study against predefined eligibility criteria. A third reviewer will resolve any disagreement. Data will be extracted using a predefined data extraction form following best practice. Study quality will be assessed using the Phillips checklist for decision analytic modelling. A narrative synthesis will be used.
Ethics and dissemination The results will be made available in a scientific peer-reviewed journal paper, will be presented at relevant conferences and will also be made available through the ROADMAP project.
PROSPERO registration number CRD42017073874.
- dementia
- Alzheimer’s disease
- economic model
- disease progression
- systematic review
This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors All authors participated in designing this review. MKa and RW wrote this protocol. MKa, RW, AF and A-LP devised the search strategy. PL, RW, AMG, MKn, FITL, IG, JW, AT-H, RH and AYCS critically appraised the protocol and contributed to its development. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.
Funding The review is part of the Real World outcomes across the AD spectrum for better care (ROADMAP) project. This project has received funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking under grant agreement no 116020 (’ROADMAP'). This Joint Undertaking receives support from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and EFPIA.
Competing interests AT-H is an employee of Eli Lilly and Company Limited and owns stock in Eli Lilly and Company Limited. AYCS is an employee of F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. RH reports grants from ROADMAP (IMI2; public-private collaboration; 2016–2019) to conduct this study, grants from BIOMARKAPD (EU JPND project; 2012–2016), grants from Actifcare (EU JPND project; 2014–2017), grants from European Brain Council (VoT project; public–private collaboration; 2017), grants from Dutch Flutemetamol Study (public–private collaboration; 2012–2017), personal fees from Piramal (advisory; 2016), personal fees from Roche (advisory; 2017), outside the submitted work. PL is employed by, owns stock in and has stock options in Novartis Pharma AG. Novartis Pharma AG, GE Healthcare, Biogen, Eli Lilly and Company Limited and Roche are industry partners in the ROADMAP Project.
Patient consent The study is a systematic literature review. It did not involve any contact with patients.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.